Home Blog Page 26

Being a Super Hero Only Looks Good in Comic Books

0

Many people hear the call of service and want to wear body armor and a cape. However, this is a profoundly bad idea. The law strongly disfavors ordinary citizens becoming vigilantes. Moreover, we have no known aliens with amazing powers, individuals enhanced by government experimentation or human hybrids with other humanoid species flying around major US cities.

With that said, who doesn’t like comic book super heroes? And for all the super lawyers out there, what legal issues are there in fighting crime after being given a magical amulet?

Vigilantism is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as, “The act of a citizen who takes the law into his or her own hands by apprehending and punishing suspected criminals.”

“Vigilantism” is also defined under case law as “unreasonable self-help action by citizens that tends to disrupt the administration of the criminal justice system.” State v. Johnson, 1998 NMCA 19, P 15, 124 N.M. 647, 954 P.2d 79.

So, what does this mean for all of our comic book super heroes? Let’s review the different types of heroes to see who is a vigilante vs those engaging in law enforcement.

Criminals Are a Cowardly Lot…

Comic characters who take up arms and hunt criminals are with little question vigilantes. Examples on one extreme would be the Punisher and the other Batman.  Both lost family members and took up arms to stop criminals.

There are obvious differences between the two, besides Marvel and DC. Punisher kills, where Batman has rules against killing (unless you are Darkside in Final Crisis). However, while the Punisher is not operating under any color of law besides avenging “justice” by killing criminals, Batman at least has tacit consent by Gotham City’s use of the Bat Signal to call for Batman’s help (perhaps showing Batman is deputized by local law enforcement).

Brilliant, Well-Funded & Armed

Tony Stark and Hank Pym are prime examples of the brilliant scientists who engineer super-human powers for themselves.

Some of these characters are defined in role playing games are “high tech wonders” and others “altered humans.” The key is whether they are using technology or has science changed their bodies.

For Stark his power is an advanced body armor that serves as a weapons platform; Pym his “Pym Particles” who he used to shirk or grew, depending on the decade and which identity Pym was using to fight crime (Ant Man, Giant-Man, Goliath, Yellow Jacket, or Wasp).

Granted, Batman could also fall in this category given his utility belt and advanced weapons. However, Batman uses more of his body through training as a weapon, where heroes such as Iron Man have built full blown body armor.

Iron Man falls in an interesting category, because the character was originally his alter ego’s body guard. Additionally, with Tony Stark being a Cold War weapons manufacturer, Marvel had a character arguably who was different than a vigilante. The issue would turn on whether Iron Man was operating as Stark’s body guard or going beyond such services (or a private citizen developing his own foreign policy arguably during the Armor Wars, something else frowned upon under the 1799 Logan Act).

Granted, Tony Stark eventually went public with his secret identity and held such positions as Secretary of Defense and Director of SHIELD. Under these positions, Stark was acting within the “police powers” of the Government.

Government Sponsored Heroes

The [fictional] United States Government has created and sponsored various super heroes. The most notable of course being Captain America.

Pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, Congress can “raise and support armies…” In a world where villains (especially if sponsored by a foreign power) can blow up buildings, Congress raising an army of super humans would not be out of the realm of possibility.

These heroes might have Posse Comitatus Act issues without specific legislation, but if authorized by Congress, would be the most “legal” form for a super hero to be operating within the law.

State-sponsored heroes would also need to follow the US Constitution and our laws on search, seizure and arrest. With that said, how many times in the comics has a super hero read a villain their Miranda rights?

A spin on this would be Green Lantern. While not authorized by Congress, Hal Jordan was selected by a Green Power Ring created by the Guardians of the Universe to protect Sector 2814. In essence, Green Lantern is a cosmic police officer. While the Guardians are free to create whatever selection criteria for the Green Lantern Corps, there would still be jurisdictional issues of a “alien” government setting law enforcement terms within the United States (or any country on Earth).

However, if a giant red alien shows up and starts eating buses with school children, elected officials probably will let that detail slide.

You’re Not Just Anyone

Superman is perhaps the most classic super hero of all time.

Superman arguably started out as a vigilante for a brief period of time, but since he at first represented “truth, justice and the American Way,” he was a symbol of working within the system.

This was also evidenced in such classics as Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns (where Superman worked for the American government, which had banned heroes) and New Frontiers (which also banned heroes).

On the flip side, if a “person” can jump tall buildings in a single bound and is faster than a speeding bullet, society would accept his help. I mean, who would stop him?

If There Were Heroes…

If there were super heroes, the world of Powers probably would be the most on point on what that society would look like, complete with fans treating the “powers” like sports figures or movie stars. There would be regulation if not an outright ban on being a hero, because society would not tolerate mega-humans blowing up schools or throwing cars at people.

However, we will discuss Who Killed Retro-Girl another time.

Han Shot First- The Legal Geeks On Self Defense & Star Wars

3

Attorneys Jessica Mederson and Josh Gilliland reviewing “self defense” under Common Law and the Model Penal Code in analyzing whether Han Solo was legally justified in shooting Greedo first in the original Star Wars (Episode IV).

Han’s Legal Justification For Shooting Greedo First

4

Han Shot First.

There is no question about it.

And in 1977, no one questioned it.

However, the legal question remains, was Han Solo legally justified in killing Greedo (Provided the Empire’s Doctrine of Fear had similar Common Law traditions)?

For those who do not have the scene memorized, here is the dialog from the original version from IMDB:

Greedo: [In Huttese; subtitled] Going somewhere, Solo?
Han Solo: Yes, Greedo. I was just going to see your boss. Tell Jabba I’ve got his money.
Greedo: It’s too late. You should have paid him when you had the chance. Jabba’s put a price on your head so large, every bounty hunter in the galaxy will be looking for you. I’m lucky I found you first.
Han Solo: Yeah, but this time I’ve got the money.
Greedo: If you give it to me, I might forget I found you.
Han Solo: [stealthily going for his blaster] I don’t have it with me. Tell Jabba…
Greedo: Jabba’s through with you! He has no use for smugglers who drop their shipments at the first sign of an Imperial cruiser.
Han Solo: Even I get boarded sometimes. Do you think I had a choice?
Greedo: You can tell that to Jabba. At best, he may only take your ship.
Han Solo: Over my dead body!
Greedo: That’s the idea… I’ve been looking forward to this for a long time.
Han Solo: Yeah, I’ll bet you have.
[Han blasts Greedo, then heads out, tossing the bartender a coin]
Han Solo: Sorry about the mess.

Enter the 1990s

The 1997 re-release of Star Wars has Greedo firing his blaster before Han.

Moreover, Greedo wildly misses in extremely close quarters, if not point blank range.

This made Greedo not just a horrible shot, but an extremely bad bounty hunter.

Greedo should have been a Nerf Herder.

Always Shoot First

Here are the basic facts: Han is stopped at gunpoint by Greedo. During the entire conversation in the bar, Greedo has his weapon pointed directly at Han. There is a dispute over money, with Han saying “Over my dead body,” to which Greedo replies, “That’s the idea. I’ve been looking forward to this for a long time.”

Second, let’s review the Model Penal Code on using deadly force in self-defense. The MPC states:

§ 8.02   Use of Deadly force

[A]  Common Law – Deadly force is only justified in self-protection if the defendant reasonably believes that its use is necessary to prevent imminent and unlawful use of deadly force by the aggressor.  Deadly force may not be used to combat an imminent deadly assault if a non-deadly response will apparently suffice.

[B]  Model Penal Code – The Code specifically sets forth the situations in which deadly force is justifiable:  when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary to protect himself on the present occasion against:

1. Death;

2. Serious bodily injury;

3. Forcible rape; or

4. Kidnapping. 

The Code prohibits the use of deadly force by a deadly aggressor, i.e., one who, “with the purpose of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter.” [MPC § 3.04(2)(b)(i)] 

The issue under common law is whether Han reasonably believed that deadly force was necessary to prevent imminent and unlawful use of deadly force by the Greedo. 

Under the Model Penal Code, the issue is whether Han believed deadly force was immediately necessary to protect himself against 1) Death (in the event Greedo fired first); 2) Serious bodily injury (a blaster wound likely do serious injury if not fatal) or 3) Kidnapping (Greedo arguably could have intended to take Han to Jabba the Hut.)

The next issue is whether Han was required to “retreat” from Greedo.

The rules state:

§ 8.03   Retreat Rule

[A]  Common Law – If a person can safely retreat and, therefore, avoid killing the aggressor, deadly force is unnecessary. Nonetheless, jurisdictions are sharply split on the issue of retreat.  A slim majority of jurisdictions permit a non-aggressor to use deadly force to repel an unlawful deadly attack, even if he is aware of a place to which he can retreat in complete safety. Many jurisdictions, however, provide that a non-aggressor who is threatened by deadly force must retreat rather than use deadly force, if he is aware that he can do so in complete safety.

A universally recognized exception to the rule of retreat is that a non-aggressor need not ordinarily retreat if he is attacked in his own dwelling place or within its curtilage [the immediately surrounding land associated with the dwelling], even though he could do so in complete safety.

[B]  Model Penal Code – One may not use deadly force against an aggressor if he knows that he can avoid doing so with complete safety by retreating.  Retreat is not generally required in one’s home or place of work.  However, retreat from the home or office is required: (1) if the defendant was the initial aggressor, and wishes to regain his right of self-protection; or (2) even if he was not the aggressor, if he is attacked by a co-worker in their place of work. However, the Code does not require retreat by a non-aggressor in the home, even if the assailant is a co-dweller.

Finally, we must consider whether Han had a “reasonable belief” about Greedo’s threat. The Model Penal Code states:

§ 8.04   “Reasonable Belief” 

The privilege of self-defense is based on reasonable appearances, rather than on objective reality. Thus, a person is justified in using force to protect himself if he subjectively believes that such force is necessary to repel an imminent unlawful attack, even if appearances prove to be false.

Courts are increasingly applying a standard of the “reasonable person in the defendant’s situation” in lieu of the “reasonable person” standard.  Factors that may be relevant to the defendant’s situation or circumstances include:

  1. The physical movements of the potential assailant;
  2. Any relevant knowledge the defendant has about that person;
  3. The physical attributes of all persons involved, including the defendant;
  4. Any prior experiences which could provide a reasonable basis for the belief that the use of deadly force was necessary under the circumstances.

Applying the facts to the Model Penal Code and Common Law, Han was justified in shooting first and killing Greedo. Without a doubt, having a blaster pointed directly at Han put his life in danger. Additionally, Greedo’s statement “That’s the idea. I’ve been looking forward to this for a long time,” communicated Greedo’s intent to kill Han. Shooting first was the only away to prevent Greedo from using deadly force himself.

 

Greedo_NerfHerder_3024

As for the retreat issue, Han was already at gunpoint and cornered in the booth when Han shot Greedo. It is unlikely Han could have retreated with his back to the wall and in a seated position. Shooting his way out appeared to be his only option.

Finally, reasonable belief: Han was in Mos Eisley Spaceport, a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Second, Greedo had his weapon pointed at Han the entire time, with Han cornered in a booth. This should be sufficient to show the reasonableness of the threat to Han’s life.

While Han was justified in shooting first, a better question is why did Malcolm Reynolds shoot the Alliance pilot who was surrendering in Serenity?

Hello. My Name is Jessica and I’m a Legal Geek

0

Okay, it’s 2012, so I guess it isn’t that brave to identify myself as a geek (on the other hand, it still takes guts to admit to strangers that I’m a lawyer).  In fact, because it’s now cool to be a geek (at least to other geeks), I feel required to establish my geek credentials:

It all started in 1977, when I saw Star Wars: A New Hope in the theater, sitting on my dad’s lap.  Transfixed by Darth Vader, I fell in love with Star Wars (the original three movies, anyway) and soon became a fan of Star Trek (both the movies and the first two television series) as well.  I don’t know if I’m technically supposed to like both – according to Fanboys I’m breaking the rules but can’t help myself!  Despite my love affair with both Star Wars and Star Trek, I wouldn’t call myself a TV or movie sci fi geek.  I’ve never seen Dr. Who, Blade Runner, Battlestar Galactica, or even Avatar.  Superhero movies, on the other hand, I adore.  I would love a quality Wonder Woman film, but once they rejected The Great Joss Whedon’s script I gave up hope of it happening in my lifetime.

And yes, I have a huge geekgirl crush on The Great Joss Whedon (I think “The Great” is an official part of his name).  Buffy is one of all the time great TV series – I own the entire series on DVD, buy the comic books, and devoured the Watchers Guides.  Angel was also awesome (what lawyer doesn’t love Wolfram & Hart)?  I haven’t seen Firefly yet, however, which is a completely wrong for somebody who calls herself both a geek and a Whedon devotee, so I’ve got it on my Netflix list and plan to watch the entire series very soon!

Meanwhile, I could talk sci fi books all day.  The first sci fi book I ever read was my dad’s copy of A Princess of Mars, the classic Edgar Rice Burroughs book that was a $200 million disaster for Disney earlier this year.  I fell in love with Barsoom, John Carter, Tars Tarkas, and Dejah Thoris then and never looked back.  After reading all of the Barsoom series my dad introduced me to Isaac Asimov, with his robot detectives and three rules of robotics and psychohistory.  After that, I read the Dune series for the first time.  To me, that is the ultimate science fiction series, so good and so deep that I’ve read the original six books at least five times and I’ve even read all of the new books put out by Frank Herbert’s son.  Since then I’ve consumed several of Robert Heinlein’s adult fiction, some Octavia Butler works, and most of Terry Pratchett’s hysterical while still depressingly insightful Discworld books.  I also love the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.  I’ve downloaded a Neil Gaiman book to my Kindle but haven’t read it yet.  I know I’m missing others but that’s all I can think of right now.

So that’s it – my geek girl credentials.  It’s a work in progress, and I hope to continue to develop my geekiness through this blog and in my spare time.  And if I can ever work a Buffy or Star Wars reference into a legal brief I will be able to say that I have reached the pinnacle of legal geekiness (okay, a panel at Comic-Con would be the true pinnacle, but I’m trying to set realistic goals).