Could President Nixon Really Blow Up Great Britain in Dr Who Prisoners of Time?

March 26, 2013

There really is no Hallmark Card for ordering a nuclear attack on an ally country because of an alien invasion. That is exactly what [the fictionalized] President Richard Nixon did in the third issue of the comic book Doctor Who Prisoners of Time celebrating the 50th Anniversary of Doctor Who.

And what surely will give people pause on realpolitik, it worked. The aliens threw up their “hands” and left Earth because of the oncoming nuclear attack.

So, could the [fictional] President Nixon simply order a nuclear attack on Great Britain? First, let’s understand the basic facts of the story.

Prisoners of Time is perhaps the only “all Doctor” story we will see for the 50th Anniversary of Doctor Who in 2013.

The story so far has focused on the first three Doctors.

There is a hooded villain with weathered skin wearing a Vortex Manipulator kidnapping the Doctor’s different traveling companions.

I suspect that the final story will have all the Doctors saving all of the traveling companions from whoever the villain is (It might be the Valleyard given the personal nature of the kidnappings, but the Master or another classic villain are possibilities).

The third issue of Prisoners of Time had members of UNIT taken over by Remoraxians, who were trying to flood the planet with rain storms, causing the oceans to rise. A CIA Agent helping the Third Doctor tells President Nixon of a failed rescue, thus Nixon orders the attack on Great Britain to save the Earth.

The US Constitution, Article I, gives the Congress the power to declare war. Article II of the Constitution names the President at the Commander-in-Chief of the military. In 1973, after Vietnam and the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, Congress passed the War Powers Act over President Nixon’s veto. The relevant part of the Act states:

Presidential Executive Power as Commander-in-Chief; Limitation The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

There is still debate whether Congress could limit Presidential power, which has not yet been litigated (the debate about using Drones in Libya without Congress authorization highlights the issue is still alive).

As to our story, there is no mention of President Nixon consulting Congress other than ordering the bombers (most likely B-52’s) to conduct a nuclear attack on Great Britain. However, the attack arguably was legal under section three of the quoted War Powers Act passage, because the Remoraxians had attacked the United States, and the rest of the planet, with a weather attack. This created national emergency, enabling the President to order an attack without Congressional authorization….and ironically help save the world.

Spoiler: They did turn the bombers around and did not nuke England. Good thing Nixon did not launch ICBM’s.

How to Scare Corporate Counsel on a Joyride

By
Josh Gilliland
-

March 15, 2013
0

I cannot imagine a more terrifying meeting with corporate counsel than pitching the recent video of a race car driver in disguise taking a sales person on a joyride.

http://youtu.be/Q5mHPo2yDG8

Let’s consider the possible legal issues the attorney was faced with in making a “surprise” online commercial:

1) Do not kill anyone.

2) Talent Releases of Everyone Filmed. Not difficult, but something to make sure is done.

3) Permission from the auto dealer in advance of the “test drive.” There would be liability issues in the event the car was damaged. One would assume phone calls were made to secure permission, confirmed with contracts. This says nothing of the risk to human life.

4) Securing permission to engage in “reckless” driving. There had to be a closed course of some kind that kept the public from entering the area where the “joyride” was taking place. Permits most likely were filed to secure this permission and road closures.

5) Permission to drive on private property at a high rate of speed. Certificates of Insurance naming the property owner as an additionally insured were most likely issued.

6) What happens if the sales person was injured or had a medical emergency from the joyride? Would there be issues of kidnapping by taking the sales person on the joyride against their will?

Many people enjoy these “gotcha” videos, but attorneys have to go on their own high speed chase to ensure all laws are followed in producing such webisodes. These are only a few of the issues to consider. There most likely were many more for corporate counsel to make decisions on, followed by an ice cold refreshing beverage that was not soda.

Is Bird Law in This Country Governed by Reason, Charlie?

By
Jessica_alegalgeek
-

March 9, 2013
0

I’ve been obsessed with It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia since the beginning. It was the logical extension of Seinfeld: four self-absorbed, superficial friends, but even more selfish, narcissistic, and completely crass. Mac, Dee, Dennis, and Frank are all great in their own sick, twisted ways, but Charlie has always been my favorite. He’s gross, he’s crazy, he’s completely lovable…and he practices law on the side!

There are several different examples of Charlie either practicing as a lawyer or dispensing legal advice, but my favorite moment has to be a brief conversation in the bar where Charlie is opining on bird law in the US:

Is he right? Does bird law in the US make sense? There are several laws and treaties that protect birds in the United States. Laws began to be passed in the late 1800s because the commercial trade in birds and their feathers had caused several damage to the populations of many bird species native to the US. Early acts were replaced by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which protects migratory birds and their parts (including eggs, nests, and feathers) unless a permit is obtained to kill or capture a bird.

This law implements the agreements we’ve entered into with the four countries with which we share migratory bird populations (i.e., at some point in their annual life cycle, these birds live in both the US and one of the other four nations). Three of the four nations are obvious: Mexico, Canada, and Russia. But I was surprised by the fourth: Japan. I didn’t realize there were birds that traveled between the US (Hawaii? Alaska?) and Japan.

There are also birds protected by the Endangered Species Act, such as the Californian Condor and the Puerto Rican Parrot. In addition, the Wild Exotic Bird Conservation Act limits the importation of non-indigenous wild birds because of the threat to those populations from the huge demand for such birds in the American pet market. And, of course, states have laws and regulations governing when certain birds (ducks, quail, etc.) can be hunted.

The bald and golden eagles even get their own act:The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. This law was originally passed in 1940 and prohibits the take, possession, sale, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export or import, of any bald or golden eagle, alive or dead, including any part, nest, or egg, unless allowed by permit. The definition of “take” includes pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb. So, in other words, don’t even look a bald eagle in the eye!

As for Charlie and the hummingbird…he is right, Dennis cannot have a hummingbird as a pet. Hummingbirds are specifically covered by the Migratory Bird Act and, as such, it is illegal to keep a hummingbird in captivity. Where Charlie is wrong, of course, is that bird law in the US is governed by reason. But I still love you, Charlie!

Doctor Who: The Effect of Regenerations on The Validity of a Will

By
Josh Gilliland
-

March 6, 2013
0

Everything dies. Your chances of dying unexpectedly also go up exponentially if you have run-ins with Ice Warriors, Cybermen, Daleks, Zygons, Voords or The Rani.

Most people plan for death by writing a will. The survivors of those who do not have a will learn very quickly about inheritance through intestate succession.

However, what about the Doctor? What effect would the ability to regenerate when one’s body dies and a wave of energy creates a new body for the former decedent? There is one way to know for sure.

The Doctor needs The Lawyer.

Death of a Time Lord

Time Lords (and script writers for 50 years) have a way of cheating death: They can regenerate 12 times.

This happens when a Time Lord “dies”: A wave of energy surrounds the dying/dead body of the Time Lord, creating a “new” body that is physically different.

There are significant personality changes and preferences in everything from clothing, manners and humor.

And sometimes diet.

Virtually every regeneration scene in Doctor Who (minus the Sixth to Seventh) showed a knowledge of impending death.

The Tenth Doctor’s “I don’t want to go” is the best evidence that the Tenth Doctor knew his “life” was ending and a new Doctor would take his place.

The power to regenerate enables Time Lords to live a very long time, but that does not mean Time Lords cannot die. For example, a Time Lord can die if the regeneration process is interrupted. Or in the Master’s case, he chose not to regenerate, and died.

The “New” Time Lord

The “new” Time Lord, despite being a different person, is still the same person at their core. This is evident in values, memories, friendships, behavior and property ownership.

And the Time Lord usually maintains the same enemies (The Doctor vs The Master is Exhibit A of this point).

Three of the best examples of different regenerations of the Doctor having common characteristics is 1) the majority of Doctors all used a sonic screwdriver; 2) three of the eleven Doctors wore bow ties (arguably the First Doctor wore an Victorian style bow tie at times); and 3) The Doctor likes having at least one traveling companion.

Virtually all of the Doctors have also shown they can do a lot of running.

However, there are significant differences between the regenerations of a Time Lord.

Take the Third Doctor for example. Every Doctor has been willing to confront their enemies, but the Third was perhaps the most physical of the Doctors with his Venusian Karate.

Why are differences in clothes, personality and whether a Time Lord gives a karate chop relevant to the validity of a will?

Because it shows that the change between regenerations creates a “new” person, which would impact the intent of a prior existing will.

The Law of Wills & Time Travel

The Black’s Law Dictionary iPad App defines a Will as:

The legal expression of an individual’s wishes about the disposition of his or her property after death; esp., a document by which a person directs his or her estate to be distributed upon death <there was no mention of his estranged brother in the will>. — Also termed testament; will and testament; (archaically) testamentary instrument.

Case law on Wills state that the “primary and paramount factor in construing a will is testator’s intention.” In re Estate of Reinhardt (1887) 74 Cal 365. State legislatures have codified the importance of the intent of the testator with code sections stating the “intention of the transferor as expressed in the instrument controls the legal effect of the dispositions made in the instrument.” Cal Prob Code § 21102.

Wills have specific rules on how they are constructed, such as the following general requirements:

1. The will must be in writing;

2. The will must be signed by the testator;

3. The will shall be witnessed by being signed, during the testator’s lifetime, by at least two persons each of whom (A) being present at the same time, witnessed either the signing of the will or the testator’s acknowledgment of the signature or of the will and (B) understand that the instrument they sign is the testator’s will.

Generally, Cal Prob Code § 6110.

The will should also be dated. This is a problem with someone who travels in time, because it can result in paradoxical interpretation of when a will was drafted.

California created a rule that beneficiaries of a will must survive the testator by 120 hours. Again, another problem for someone who travels in time, because the named beneficiary might exist in time several decades before the testator’s death, and thus has already been dead for years, even though they survived the testator. Cal Prob Code § 6211.

A holographic will does not involve holograms at all (Sorry, the Ninth Doctor’s Emergency Program 1). A holographic will is a valid will if it is written by the testator’s own handwriting and signed. Cal Prob Code § 6111.

A will is revoked if a subsequent will states the older will is revoked or by any inconsistency with the new will. See, Cal Prob Code § 6120. This is a problem for a time traveler, because a prior will can be created in time before the original will was prepared.

The Law of Intestate Succession

The Black’s Law Dictionary iPad App defines intestate succession as:

(18c) 1. The method used to distribute property owned by a person who dies without a valid will. 2.Succession by the common law of descent. — Also termed hereditary succession; descent and distribution.

The general rule for intestate success if the deceased did not have a spouse, property flows down to children (the issue of the deceased); if no children then to up parents; if no surviving parents, then to the issue of the parents. See, generally, Cal Prob Code § 6402.

Intent of the Deceased vs Regenerated Time Lord

What effect does the personality changes between regenerations have on the validity of a will? Arguably the will is no longer valid, because the changes can be great, thus revoking the intent of the past Time Lord.

Take the 10 year anniversary special The Three Doctors for example. The Second and Third Doctor openly debated with each other; the First Doctor gave them both a once over and stated, “So you are my replacements: A dandy and a clown.”

The same can be said for each time the Doctor has encountered past versions of himself in the Five Doctors, the Two Doctors, and Time Crash: all had arguments with each other.

They all then got along, with one big exception: Trial of a Time Lord.

The villain in Trial of a Time Lord was the final (or second to last) regeneration of the Doctor (known as The Valeyard), serving as the prosecutor of the Sixth Doctor for genocide and other crimes.

On a fundamental level, it is very hurtful that the Doctor “turned evil” and became a lawyer.

The Valeyard is powerful evidence that a future regeneration can have a complete change of intent, rendering any past wills to be completely invalid (and a regeneration that will probably be disregarded because of the The Last Great Time War).

What does this mean for any Time Lord with a prior will? The effect of a regeneration could result in a new version of oneself with a different set of values, requiring the new Time Lord to review their prior will for any modifications based on their current intent.

A Big Ball of Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey Legal Stuff

The effect of time travel on drafting and modifying wills would cause an attorney to scream as if they had looked into the Time Vortex in determining the intent of a Time Lord client. The law firm would also give the Doctor the nickname “The Oncoming Storm” because of the causation complexities time travel creates in interpreting the validity of a will. Consider the following hypothetical temporal legal timeline of will modifications:

This is highly problematic for an attorney, because the reasons for modifications (if not revocations) of a will are out of order, despite being in temporal order. The order of will modifications would have to be reviewed by when the Doctor made them in his lifetime, not temporal order. This fundamentally changes legal analysis. Let’s review the will history not in temporal order, but the order in which the Doctor made the will modifications:

The First Doctor prepares a will naming his granddaughter Susan to take possession of the TARDIS in the event of his death on November 23, 1963.

The Second Doctor modifies his will in 1746 to leave Jamie McCrimmon his recorder.

In 1972, the Third Doctor again modifies his will to leave Elizabeth Shaw his shoes with the keys to the TARDIS.

At 65 Million BC, the Fifth Doctor creates a pour over trust to create a mathematics scholarship in the memory of Adric.

In 2986, the Sixth Doctor again modifies his will to create a scholarship from a pour over trust for botany students on Earth in memory of the Vervoids.

In the year 200,100 the Ninth Doctor’s “holographic will” tells Rose to let the TARDIS die, be buried, and for her to live a good life.

The Eleventh Doctor in 1890 adds a codicil to his will to leave Vincent van Gogh the collected works of Andrew Wyeth (who will not be born until 1917).

Could the different hypothetical wills all be valid, despite being from different regenerations?

Maybe. A Court would look at the intent of each will and see if there are any conflicts. Moreover, were there any significant life changes (besides the regeneration) that would call into question the validity of a will? For example, getting married (or divorced) or having a child are such life changes that could show a change in intent.

Consider the above hypothetical: The First Doctor’s will to leave the TARDIS to Susan would likely not be valid after Susan left traveling with the Doctor and the Last Great Time War, because she is presumed dead with all other Time Lords. Unless she is hiding as a human.

As for Jamie McCrimmon, he died on an [comic book] adventure with the Sixth Doctor, thus Jamie would not be able to inherent under the Doctor’s will.

The Third Doctor’s will leaving his shoes with the TARDIS keys to Elizabeth Shaw would no longer be valid, because the Doctor’s banishment to Earth ended in 1973 and Shaw also left the Doctor’s company very early in the Third Doctor’s adventures.

The Fifth and Sixth Doctors’ intent to create pour over trusts would likely still be valid, provided there are funding sources for the scholarships.

However, would the Ninth Doctor’s holographic “Emergency Program 1” revoke all prior wills? While the Doctor did have a hologram giving his last wishes, the recording was not a written document in his own handwriting. However, it is arguable that Rose was the Doctor’s agent to carry out the Doctor’s final wishes.

As for Vincent van Gogh, the validity of the will would turn on when the Doctor died whether van Gogh could take under a will. If the Doctor died in the 34th Century, van Gogh in the 19th Century would not survive the Doctor the required 120 hours to take under the will (the difference between the 34th Century and the 19th Century is thousands of years longer than 120 hours).

However, consider the Eleventh Doctor’s two marriages: Marilyn Monroe and River Song. The Doctor should have changed his will after each, provided the marriages were both valid. One can imagine the marriage to Monroe was annulled shortly after the Christmas Eve ceremony. Conversely, it is difficult to say the marriage to River Song is valid, because it took place in an alternate timeline in Egypt caused by a paradox with all of reality crashing down around them. This ceremony might not be valid anywhere (or any timeline) because of the temporal paradox and lack of a marriage license for Court to recognize. It is also difficult to show a Common Law or Marvin marriage, due to the lack of the Doctor and River living together for any period of time.

What does this all mean? The Doctor really should see a lawyer after regenerating to ensure all his affairs are in proper order. Moreover, the power to regenerate does not mean the there is no risk of death; seeing an attorney to have a valid will is the responsive thing to do for someone who walks in eternity.

1...124125126...138 Page 125 of 138