Join us for our weekly analysis of Hawkeye on Get Vokl.
Review Episodes 1-3
Review Episode 4
Review Episode 5
Review Episode 6
WandaVision asked an ugly question: Was Director Tyler Hayward of SWORD justified in ordering a drone strike on Wanda Maximoff for holding nearly 4,000 people against their will in the Hex?
There is a strong argument for YES.
Wanda’s Crimes Against Westview
The first part of the analysis is understanding the crimes Wanda Maximoff was actively committing at the time Director Hayward ordered the drone strike.
The first is the False Imprisonment of 3,892 people. New Jersey defines False imprisonment as “…a disorderly persons offense if he knowingly restrains another unlawfully so as to interfere substantially with his liberty.” N.J.S. § 2C:13-3.
Wanda falsely imprisoned 3,892 people. If she had been charged and convicted of the crime, she could be facing approximately 1,946 years in jail and a fine of $3,892,000.
The second is Kidnapping of 3,892 people. New Jersey defines kidnapping as follows:
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.
N.J.S. § 2C:13-1.
Wanda held 3,892 people to facilitate the commission of a crime, specifically false imprisonment to play out her fantasy world. There is an argument she was also terrorizing her victims, but she might not have been knowingly causing that harm.
Use of Force on the Scarlet Witch
Lethal Force is justified when an officer “has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a serious threat of physical harm, either to the officer or to others.” Wells v. City of Chattanooga, Tennessee, Civil No. 1:09-CV-219, at *9-10 (E.D. Tenn. July 14, 2011). Moreover, when a suspect has taken hostages, the suspect have demonstrated a propensity for violence and unpredictability. Clay v. Williams, No. 17 C 6461, at *24 (N.D. Ill. May 31, 2020).
Wanda placed an entire town under an energy field that altered reality to suit her fantasy of a domestic life based on classic sitcoms. While there is debate over at what point Wanda went from having a nervous breakdown from her personal loss to knowingly holding nearly 4,000 people against their wills, Director Hayward could argue there was probable cause he believed Wanda to be a serious threat of physical harm to others.
Would firing on Wanda been a good idea? There is a strong argument for “No,” because it was unknown what would happen to the Hex if Wanda was killed and if that would have harmed the Wanda’s victims. While there is justification to fire on Wanda, the wildcard of endangering the lives of everyone in the Hex would argue against taking the shot.
“Crimes Against the Sacred Timeline.” What exactly does that mean? Would a 7 year old understand what was happening to them if charged with such a crime?
In the Loki episode “Nexus Event,” we learned that the TVA entered Asgard and arrested the young Loki, future Sylvie, while she was playing with a Viking ship, presumably Asgardian soldiers, and a wolf (possibly Fenrir) and stated in game play that they had saved Asgard. Loki’s playtime was interrupted by the TVA placing her under arrest for “Crimes Against the Sacred Timeline.” She was forcibly taken from her home (and unknown to her parents) to be put on trial.
There is a lot wrong with that.
Arresting Children
Texas [naturally] has specific code sections on arresting children. A police officer can arrest a child if there is probable cause the child has engaged in 1) penal code violations; 2) delinquent conduct indicating a need for supervision; or 3) probation violations imposed by a juvenile court. 54.01. Tex. Fam. Code § 52.01(a)(3)(A), (B), and (C).
Federal law requires that when a juvenile is arrested, the arresting officer “shall immediately” tell the child of their legal rights in language they can understand AND immediately tell the juvenile’s parents, guardian, or custodian, that the child was taken into custody. 18 U.S.C. § 5033. This is code for “Give the kid Miranda rights in terms they can understand.” This is because it is radically unjust to deny a child their human rights.
None of that happened with Loki. Safe bet Odin and Frigga would not have been ok with fascist time cops arresting their child to be sentenced to nonexistence.
Loki on Trial
A child must be competent to stand trial, which requires them to be able to consult with their lawyer and assist in preparing their defense. If a court has doubt the child is competent, the proceeding is to be suspended. Cal. Welf. and Inst. Code § 709.
Would young Loki be competent to stand trial? She would understand she was taken from her home, but would be totally clueless on the TVA, the charge against her, and if she even had a defense attorney, would have a hard time assisting in her defense. Not because she was not bright, but because there is a significant “What the Hell is Happening” factor with being “arrested” by the TVA.
Legality for Executing Children
Civil society is horrified at executing children. The United States Supreme Court has held that children are constitutionally different from adults for the purposes of sentencing, because children have diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform. Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 471, 132 S. Ct. 2455, 2464 (2012) [citations omitted]. Children are still developing their character and are more vulnerable to negative influences (code for bad home life or mass incarceration). Id.
If a state is going to execute a minor, “great care must be taken to ensure that the minor truly deserves to be treated as an adult.” Burger v. Kemp, 483 U.S. 776, 824 (1987). There must be a specific inquiry on the “age, actual maturity, family environment, education, emotional and mental stability, and . . . prior record” in determining a minor’s criminal culpability. Id.
What did Loki do to get arrested? Play with toys and want to be the hero? Save the day? That does not scream death sentence. It does offer a spin on the Pygmalion Effect, that if you treat someone as a villain, she will become one.
Friday, November 26 @ 730pm- Ghostbusters: Law for the Afterlife
Saturday, November 27 @ 100pm – A Lawyer’s Holiday Special
2:30 pm in ROOM 709 Journey to the Lower Decks for strange new worlds of legal analysis with The Legal Geeks! Defending First Officers who turn into zombies and vengeful gods with the insanity defense! Just what is the liability for creating the murderous hologram Badgey? Can senior officers send ensigns out to run personal errands? And let’s not forget the penalties for disobeying lawful orders. Join our panel of lawyers for their analysis of Star Trek Lower Decks.
2:30 pm in ROOM 709 In Wandavision, Wanda subjected an entire town into her sitcom-oriented alternate reality. In this panel, we put Wanda on trial. Is she guilty of kidnapping? Torture? Copyright infringement? Is mind control a crime even if you don’t know you are doing it? Or was she simply protecting herself in the only way she could? Is Vision liable as an accessory to the crimes? Our panel of legal experts (including Phil Weiser, the Attorney General of Colorado) discuss and debate the issues. Panelists: Bethany Bengfort, Durie Tangri LLP Nari Ely, Durie Tangri LLP Josh Gilliland, The Legal Geeks, Mollybeth Kocialski, US Patent & Trademark Office Mark Lemley, Stanford Law School Phil Weiser, Attorney General.
1:30 pm in ROOM 709 The Classic Universal Monsters set the gold standard for horror films. These movies also raise great legal issues. Could Frankenstein’s Monster be legal competent to stand trial for the death of Little Maria? Is the Wolf Man a Peeping Tom? Would the Creature from the Black Lagoon be an Endangered Species? Is it desecration of a corpse to bring a mummy to life? Join our panel of lawyers to find out the answers to these monstrous legal issues. Presented by The Legal Geeks.
The field of battle
The first season of Attack on Titan (AoT) introduced us to humanity’s gruesome struggle against what seemed to be a never-ending onslaught of humanoid monsters dubbed – titans. These titans served as the central antagonist in the first couple seasons as they senselessly killed civilians and posed as the central national security risk to the Eldian Empire as they continued to destroy the walls guarding civilization.
As posed, this struggle seems to be man against nature, not a situation where laws of armed conflict come into play. However, this dynamic changes with two massive revelations. First, not all titans are the same. Second and most importantly, at the end of AoT’s third season we learn that most titans are not natural. Certain titans are manufactured by the Marleyan Empire and have been used as weapons against Paradis Island and other states.
Not all weapons are allowed
Just because we may be in an armed conflict does not give a state or an armed group the green light to use any weapon or stratagem to beat their opponent. States have to go through a strict process when developing weapons to ensure they are capable of being deployed into the conflict. Additionally, when creating or testing these weapons a state cannot subject POWs or civilians to testing. Failure to avoid any of these things results in an international law violation.
Before a new weapon or strategy can be used on the field of battle, a commander needs to ensure a few things. First, the commander needs to see that the weapon will not cause superfluous injury. Second, the commander needs to ensure that it won’t cause unnecessary suffering. And lastly, tying into the principle of distinction, is that there is a way for the weapon to be used discriminately to prevent adverse effects to civilians and other protected people. Basically, is there a human element that can help control the weapon’s targeting and prevent it from hurting protected classes.
Even if these questions are satisfied this is only half of the considerations. Commanders need to see that the weapon will not be used on protected classes e.g. POWs or civilians. In times of armed conflict, both POWs and civilians are meant to be protected. The list of protections are laid in the Third Geneva Convention for POWs and the Fourth Geneva Convention for civilians. These protections are broad but running through each of the four conventions is Common Article 3 (CA3). CA3 endeavors to broadly protect those from a long list atrocities that might occur once captured. For our interests, a few protections from CA3 stick out. First, Section A of CA3 prohibits “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture.” Second, Section C prohibits “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.” Lastly, Section D prohibits “the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.” All of these prohibitions are violated by Marley in their quest for dominance via the titans.
Not all titans are the same
Throughout AoT we are shown that there are two distinct groups of titans: those that are manufactured and those that are controlled by individuals. Marley uses both groups of titans to expand their territorial holdings and to exert geopolitical strength against prospective challengers. Marley’s creation and use of manufactured titans establishes them as IHL violators. How so? Well…
Type 1: Manufactured Titans
The manufactured titans, like those in the below picture, do not come from a laboratory. Instead, they are created from POWs of foreign countries that Marley has conquered. This extends too to the Eldians that live within relegated zones under Marley’s control and captured members of Eldia’s military. Marley uses spinal fluid from the Beast Titan to cause the transformation and then deploys the POWs and Eldians against their own people. The simple creation of these titans violates CA3 of the Geneva Conventions because they are used for experiments and torture and the transformation ultimately mutilates their body. Further, this transformation is seen as a form of execution because their life ends and no legal system intervenes – Marley’s government is complicit in these actions. Marley knows that these titans cannot discern who is a civilian and who is not, and they continue to consciously deploy them to subjugate the people of Paradis Island into a state of being a non-threat. Because these titans can’t discern and because they cause unnecessary suffering harm with their actions they fail the remaining portion of the considerations.
Type 2: Shifting Titans
Marley has not violated international law through its use of the “shifting” titans. The titans that are manufactured far outnumber the titans that can shift because the shifters are passed from one individual to the next through a gruesome process. These shifting titans each have an individualized, special ability that sets them apart from the common ones. This includes titans such as the: Founding Titan, the Warhammer Titan, the Cart Titan, the Beast Titan, and the Attack Titan pictured to the right.
Further, these titans are controlled by the wielders personally and adopt the same intelligence and knowledge of their wielder. The wielder at any time can activate the transformation into the titan and can back out of the transformation. These titans can discern who are targets and who are not and have a record of not blatantly going after civilians. Lastly, Marley controls who passes the titans too and it keeps them within their military ranks. Typically, they do not allow POWs or civilians from Eldia to acquire these titans but have allowed some once they have proven their loyalty to Marley. Thus, there are no violations of the Geneva Conventions in this process.
Conclusion
In an armed conflict, it is obvious that neither side wants to drag the conflict out longer than is necessary because that adds to the harm each party has to bear. Quickening the conflict can be done by the introduction of new weapons or stratagems. But, quickening is done improperly if it violates general principles of IHL or if the weapons are used on protected classes.
Marley’s wars were fought quickly and effectively. But, those military victories were fueled by the expending of many POWs and civilians in ways that should never have happened. The creation and continued use of manufactured titans against Paradis Island and the world extended the long record of IHL and international law violations that Marley must account for. While horrific, Marley did not violate IHL nor international law through its “shifting” titans because of their origins and ability to discriminate in conflict.
My career has entailed a substantial amount of document review, blog posts, articles, and presentations over the years. I also have done hundreds of webinars and podcasts. Finding a comfortable chair has been hit and miss, so when E-WIN contacted me about reviewing one of their E-WIN gaming chairs, I was more than interested.
What I Like about the Knight Series Chair
First things first: I love the chair.
I was able to assemble my E-WIN chair in under 30 minutes. The chair has an ergonomic design, which is a quantum leap improvement over my prior chair that was 15 years old. It is supportive of my back, with a comfortable headrest. It’s price being just under $200 is also good to see for those looking for a new chair for their office.
While not as fun as playing video games, I have conducted a substantial amount of document review to identify deposition exhibits in the E-WIN. I found the back support really effective at helping me maintain good posture while constructing searches and issue coding hits.
I have used the chair for both video livestreams and podcasts. I absolutely prefer the comfort and design of the Knight Series over my old chair, using a bar stool, or kitchen chair to record.
The E-WIN has improved my home office and I would like to get one for my firm.
If you are looking to upgrade your office chair with a heavy duty gaming chair that can hold up to 400 lbs, readers of the The Legal Geeks can get 20% off with the code “Legalgeeks”. Check out E-WIN for more.