Home Blog

The Necessity Defense in Strange New Worlds

0

Star Trek Strange New Worlds is a return to live action episodic storytelling in the Star Trek franchize. The first episode embraced Trek’s heritage of taking on complex issues in the reflection of science fiction. In the story, the pre-warp civilization of Kiley 279 was on the brink of civil war. The ruling nation-state developed weapons of mass destruction after observing the battle seen in the season two finale of Star Trek Discovery. Their plan was to obliterate the “revolutionary” faction with a “Warp Bomb.” Or “Warp Bombs.” 

Captain Christopher Pike found himself in a bind with General Order Number One, which prohibits interfering in the development of civilizations without warp drive. The fact Kiley 279 had learned of warp technology from a battle the Federation had covered up, meant there had already been “cultural contamination.” However, General Order Number One technically prohibited the USS Enterprise crew from correcting the cultural contamination. 

Captain Pike’s solution? He told his First Officer, “Screw General Order Number One.” In a homage to classic science fiction films, he asked, “Take me to your leader,” after being captured. Pike talked down the warring factions with a history lesson from Earth of Kiley 279’s possible future with war. More importantly, he inspired them to reach for a brighter future to join the Federation of Planets. 

If there was a Starfleet JAG officer preparing a defense for Captain Pike, the best option is the necessity defense, which is an affirmative defense to a crime. Captain Pike would have to show that the “harm that would have resulted from compliance with the law would have significantly exceeded the harm actually resulting from the defendant’s breach of the law.” State v. Rein, 477 N.W.2d 716, 717 (Minn. App. 1991).

The test for the necessity defense in California (assuming Starfleet Command followed similar factors in its Code of Military Justice) has the following elements: 

1. Captain Pike acted in an emergency to prevent a significant bodily harm or evil to Kiley 279;

2. Captain Pike had no adequate legal alternative;

3. The defendant’s acts did not create a greater danger than the one avoided;

4. When the defendant acted, he actually believed that the act was necessary to prevent the threatened harm or evil;

5. A reasonable person would also have believed that the act was necessary under the circumstances; AND

6. The defendant did not substantially contribute to the emergency.

CALCRIM No. 3403.

Applying the elements to Captain Pike’s actions, an attorney could argue:

1) Captain Pike acted to avoid a planetary war;

2) The legal remedy was to let the people of Kiley 279 kill each other with Warp Bombs;

3) Captain Pike’s actions did not create a more dangerous situation;

4) Captain Pike believed his actions would avoid a war;

5) A reasonable person would believe Captain Pike’s actions were necessary; and

6) Captain Pike did not contribute to the emergency. 

Openly breaking the law is never a good plan. It should not be standard operating procedure. However, Star Trek has a precedent for showing how the needs of the many can sometimes require finding legal exceptions to complex problems. Stopping a nuclear holocaust is one such exception. 

Warping the Necessity Defense

0

Star Trek has a long history of not following orders. These actions often can fall under the “necessity defense” or “defense of necessity.” To illustrate how the defense can be applied, let’s review Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.

Admiral James T. Kirk learned from Vulcan Ambassador Sarek that Spock would have shared his immortal soul known as a katra with someone before death. Kirk quickly determined Captain Spock performed a mind meld with an unconscious Leonard McCoy, before Spock sacrificed himself to save the USS Enterprise. McCoy began suffering psychological problems from the mind meld, which resulted in his arrest, and ultimately to be sent to a psychiatric hospital.[1]

Kirk requested the use of the decommissioned USS Enterprise for a mission to the Genesis Planet to recover Spock’s body and take it to Vulcan, in order to save both Dr. McCoy and Spock’s soul. Admiral Harry Morrow denied Kirk’s request.

Not one to take “no” for an answer, Kirk and Sulu broke McCoy out of jail. The senior crew of the Enterprise then assisted in the theft of the USS Enterprise, plus threatening one transporter officer and sabotaging the USS Excelsior.

Could a lawyer such as Samuel T. Cogley have defended Admiral Kirk and the surviving crew of the Enterprise with the necessity defense, if the crew of the Enterprise had not plead guilty after saving Earth (again) in Star Trek IV?[2]

The necessity defense is an affirmative defense to a crime. Kirk would have to show that the “harm that would have resulted from compliance with the law would have significantly exceeded the harm actually resulting from the defendant’s breach of the law.”[3]

Could the necessity defense apply to breaking Dr. McCoy out of the Starfleet holding cell? The test in California (where Starfleet Command is located) has the following for the necessity defense for escaping prisoners that must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence[4]:

    1. The defendant was faced with a specific threat of death or substantial bodily injury in the immediate future;
    2. There was a history of complaints that were not acted on, so that a reasonable person would conclude that any additional complaints would be ineffective;
    3. There was no time or opportunity to seek help from the courts;
    4. The defendant did not use force or violence against prison personnel or other people in the escape [other than the person who was the source of the threatened harm to the defendant];

AND

    1. The defendant immediately reported to the proper authorities when he had attained a position of safety from the immediate threat.

First, Dr. McCoy needed treatment for his side effects of the Vulcan mind meld that were causing a risk to McCoy’s health, from speaking in Spock’s voice, to delusions, to obsessive behavior. Moreover, Spock’s katra was in danger. Second, Admiral Kirk had sought permission to take the Enterprise to Genesis in order to treat McCoy and Spock, which had been denied. Third, given the need for immediate medical treatment, and the classified nature of Project Genesis, the Courts were an unlikely option. Fourth, McCoy did not use force against the guards, but both Kirk and Sulu assaulted the Starfleet prison personnel. This element is problematic, because the guards were just doing their jobs when Kirk and Sulu subdued them. Fifth, the crew of the Enterprise reported to Vulcan, one of the charter members of the Federation of Planets.

Expert testimony would need to be offered to prove McCoy was in immediate danger. Case law states that “imminent” means “likely to happen without delay.”[5] In terms of medical dangers, Courts have found that risk created by high blood sugar caused by diabetes was not imminent danger.[6] While a mind meld with someone’s soul is not in the same category as high blood sugar, the Defense would need to explain the danger to both McCoy and Spock.

The analysis of breaking McCoy out of jail and for stealing the USS Enterprise is substantially the same. Kirk must also prove they did not create a greater danger than the one avoided; that a reasonable person would also have believed that the act was necessary under the circumstances; and that the crew of the Enterprise did not substantially contribute to the emergency.[7]

There are maritime cases that show how the necessity defense has been applied over the centuries. Examples include crews who revolted and forced a vessel to return to port because it was unseaworthy; ships to take refuge in a blockaded or embargoed port due to dangerous weather; or make a stop in a prohibited place due to heavy traffic.[8] None of these are helpful to the defense, so the argument would need to be factually argued to the elements in the jury instructions.

The crew of the Enterprise did not create a danger greater than the one avoided (the Klingons were the ones who destroyed the USS Grissom). A reasonable person could logically conclude that stealing the Enterprise was necessary under the circumstances. Finally, Kirk did not substantially contribute to the emergency. While the prosecution would argue there was the risk of extensive damage to space dock or the USS Excelsior from sabotage. However, given there was not, these arguments would fail as speculative.

The argument that potentially does not fail is the destruction of the USS Enterprise. If the ship had a full crew, the automation circuits would not have overloaded, and the vessel would not have been crippled with one shot. My guess is this argument would fail, because Kirk turned death into a fighting chance for life.

The Search for Spock is Star Trek at its purest. The story is one of loyalty to friends where the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many. Kirk, Scotty, Chekov, Sulu, and Uhura acted without hesitation to save both Dr. McCoy from a Vulcan mindmeld and Spock’s immortal soul, even if it meant destroying their careers and prison sentences. All of their actions were born from the necessity of saving their shipmates. All of their actions showed that the necessity defense was a test of character in facing a no-win scenario. And that is one of the greatest messages in Star Trek.

[1] See, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, Released June 1, 1984, Paramount Pictures, http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Trek_III:_The_Search_for_Spock, Last visited April 1, 2016

[2] Cogley was the attorney who defended Captain Kirk in the Original Series episode “Court Martial.” See, http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Court_Martial_(episode), Last visited April 1, 2016.

[3] State v. Rein, 477 N.W.2d 716, 717 (Minn. App. 1991).

[4] 2-2600 CALCRIM 2764

[5] United States v. Wilde (D.Alaska Oct. 11, 2011, No. 4:10-cr-021-SAO) 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117121, at *24.

[6] U.S. v. Perdomo-Espana, 522 F.3d 983, 987 (9th Cir. 2008).

[7] 2-3400 CALCRIM 3403.

[8] United States v. Ashton, 24 F.Cas. (C.C.Mass.1834) (No. 14,470); The William Gray, 29 F.Cas. 1300 (C.C.N.Y.1810) (No. 17,694); The Brig Struggle v. United States, 13 U.S. (9 Cranch) 71, 3 L.Ed. 660 (1815); and Commonwealth v. Brooks, 99 Mass. 434 (1868).

Can You Defend the Invisible Man for Breaking Out of Prison?

0

The 1940 Invisible Man Returns features Vincent Price as Sir Geoffrey Radcliffe, an owner of a coalmine who is falsely convicted for the death of his brother and sentenced to death. The legal system having failed him, Radcliffe’s friend Dr. Frank Griffin, brother to the deceased original Invisible Man, used the invisibly formula on Radcliffe so he could escape execution. Imagine the Fugitive, but the hero is invisible and slowly going insane while looking for the real killer.

It should be clear as day that prison breaks are frowned upon. The punishment for a prison break for a felony is a fine or five years in prison. 18 U.S.C.S. § 751(a). Moreover, those who aide in a prison break can also be subject to imprisonment for up to five years. 18 U.S.C.S. § 752.

Here is the thing for Sir Geoffrey Radcliffe: he was to be executed the day of the escape. Legally speaking, Radcliffe had nothing to lose. Dr. Griffin on the other hand had a lot to lose with imprisonment for aiding in the escape of a felon. Lucky for both, there is a defense for them: Necessity Defense based on Radcliffe’s actual innocence. The necessity defense has a three-part test:

(1) There is no legal alternative to violating the law;

(2) The harm to be prevented is imminent; and

(3) A direct, causal relationship is reasonably anticipated to exist between defendant’s action and the avoidance of harm. 

United States v. Benally, 233 F. App’x 864, 868 (10th Cir. 2007).

Sir Radcliffe had no legal alternative to violating the law, as he was going to be executed for a crime he did not commit; his execution was imminent; and Radcliffe escaped prison to avoid being executed for his brother’s death. As society does not want death row prisoners escaping, we have to address the fact that Radcliffe was innocent and that the legal system failed him. Even after escaping, Radcliffe would still need to prove his actual innocence, which would require:

(1) The new evidence will probably change the result if a new trial is granted;

(2) It must have been discovered since the trial;

(3) It must be such as could not have been discovered before trial by the exercise of due diligence;

(4) It must be material to the issue;

(5) It must not be cumulative; and

(6) It must not be merely impeaching or contradictory to the former evidence.

See People v Marino, 99 AD3d 726, 730; People v Tankleff, 49 AD3d at 179.

Radcliffe was successful in learning about the conspiracy to kill his brother and the identity of the killer. The ultimate confessions by two individuals would be “new evidence” that would have changed the result of the trial, that was material, and there was no way to know it. Because if due diligence could have discovered the evidence, both the prosecutor and defense attorney would wish they were invisible before the ethics board.

Defending the Ghost for her Crimes in Ant-Man and The Wasp

0

The Ghost phasing through the mold of villains in Ant-Man and the Wasp by being an adversary who was a victim seeking a cure, not someone intent of causing massive carnage or revenge (see Red Skull, Loki, Whiplash, Ultron, HYDRA, Abomination, or The Hand, to name a few). The fact the Ghost is someone seeking a cure for a physical illness caused by an experiment, she actually has legal defenses for a jury.

Ghost Stories

Ava Starr was injured as a child by energy from the Quantum Realm in an experiment conducted by her “egghead” father Elihas Starr.  Ava’s physical condition from the accident was being out of phase with the universe. Ava was taken in by SHIELD to become a field agent used for clandestine missions with her abilities to pass through solid objects. Ava’s abilities were exploited by SHIELD (which had been compromised by HYDRA). She was later cast out on her own after SHIELD fell (as seen in Captain America The Winter Soldier and Agents of SHIELD).

Starr’s physical condition deteriorated to the point she going to cease to exist. Her body kept phasing, resulting in her being in a state of pain and mental distress. She had to sleep in a chamber designed by Bill Foster to slow her decay from existence.

The Ghost committed multiple forms of assault, larceny, and burglary, or larceny to steal a miniaturized building, in order to find a cure for her condition. The most challenging of her crimes is the killing the corrupt FBI Agent Stoltz in order to acquire Hank Pym’s laboratory. While the FBI agent was on the take from the criminal Sonny Burch, the death of a Federal agent causes a significant problem in defending Starr.

Lay the Ghost of Crimes to Rest

The Ghost’s crimes were in the city and county of San Francisco. However, the Ghost did kill a Federal agent, so Ava Starr could be prosecuted in both California and Federal Court for her separate crimes.

There are two plausible defenses for Ava Starr. The first is the medical necessity defense and the other insanity.

The common law medical necessity defense has the same elements as the necessity defense. A defendant can argue the necessity defense when for any criminal act, except taking an innocent human life. People v. Trippet, 56 Cal. App. 4th 1532, 1538, (1997), citing People v. Pena 149 Cal. App. 3d Supp. 14, 22 (1983). The six elements to the defense require the defendant to prove:

  1. The act charged as criminal must have been done to prevent a significant evil;
  2. There must have been no adequate alternative to the commission of the act;
  3. The harm caused by the act must not be disproportionate to the harm avoided;
  4. The accused must entertain a good-faith belief that his act was necessary to prevent the greater harm;
  5. Such belief must be objectively reasonable under all the circumstances; and
  6. The accused must not have substantially contributed to the creation of the emergency.

Trippet, at *1538, citing Pena, at pp. Supp. 25-26.

Focusing only at the available state charges of assault and larceny, the Ghost does have a chance to argue a medical necessity defense:

  1. The attempted theft of technology to access the Quantum Realm was done to prevent her imminent death, which would be a “significant evil.”
  2. The technology was only available from the black market dealer who was selling it to Hope van Dyne;
  3. The act of stealing the technology was not disproportionate to the harm avoided, which was her death. However, this argument is weakened by every assault Starr commits;
  4. Starr had the good-faith belief that stealing the technology to access the Quantum Realm was the only way to prevent her death;
  5. The theft of technology to access the Quantum Realm was objectively reasonable. Each assault does undermine the reasonableness under all the circumstances;
  6. As to the accused must not have substantially contributed to the creation of the emergency, it was the criminal actions of Sonny Burch that caused the escalation of violation that Starr responded to in order to acquire the technology. Moreover, Ant-Man and the Wasp did break into Starr’s hideout, which makes their kidnapping a legal mulligan.

In a prior case, the necessity defense was not available to a cult de-programmer who kidnapped a cult member to “rescue” them, because the family’s knowledge of the cult was four or five years earlier. Moreover, there was no knowledge of imminent physical harm. People v. Patrick 126 Cal. App. 3d 952 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. Dec. 18, 1981). This case is distinguishable from Ava Starr’s case, because she personally had a reasonable belief to justify her actions. Starr’s danger was imminent and she had a rational belief her life was in danger.

Pale as a Ghost

Ava Starr could argue that at the time she killed FBI Agent Stoltz, she was suffering from years of physical pain from phasing in and out of reality, thus did not understand the wrongfulness of her actions. See, 18 U.S.C.S. § 17. The insanity defense is rarely effective, but there is a good argument to be made that Starr had a mental disease from her years of suffering, which caused her to not understand that killing Stoltz was wrong.

Expert testimony would be needed to explain the impact of constant physical pain caused by the exposure to the Quantum Realm upon Ava Starr. First, a psychologist could report on Starr’s mental state from a lifetime of a physical condition causing her to phase through objects. Second, the psychologist could further opine on the effect of a child being trained by SHIELD/HYDRA to conduct assassinations and espionage operations. Third, the physical impact of constant pain for years upon Starr’s mental state would need to be offered as expert opinion for the jury to consider. All of these factors could show Starr did not understand the wrongfulness of killing Agent Stoltz.

Don’t Give Up the Ghost

The Ghost was a victim of her father’s experiments that resulted in her being exploited as a weapon by HYDRA agents within SHIELD and a lifetime of physical pain. Such nightmarish conditions could drive someone mad to the point they only want the pain to stop. Ava Starr’s mind was clearly haunted by suffering and sought relief. That resulted in extreme actions, but not ones that a jury should render a life sentence for surviving.

Was Scarlet Witch Legally Justified to Kill [Spoiler] in Infinity War?

0

Unconditional love can ask a lot of a human being, like killing the android you love in order to prevent universal genocide. In Avengers Infinity War, the Vision asked the Scarlet Witch to destroy the Mind Stone embedded in his forehead, in order to prevent Thanos from acquiring the final Infinity Stone in order to kill half of all life in the universe.

Did Scarlet Witch commit the act of murder when she “killed” Vision? Would there be any legal justification for the act of “murder”?

Can a Robot be Murdered?

In order for Scarlet Witch to be prosecuted for murder, the Vision first would have to be legally recognized as a person. Murder is defined as “the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.” CA Pen. Code, § 187(a). There is no question Scarlet Witch purposely killed Vision with her Hex Powers in order to destroy the Mind Stone. However, there is the issue whether Vision, who is an artificial being, would qualify as a “human being” under the plane meaning of the law.

Scarlet Witch and all of the Avengers treated Vision as a person, not a weapons system. However, the law is a bit trickier. The Vision was not “born” but built. Our definition of biological life does not include building artificial life. The only legal principle that might find the Vision is a “person,” is the California law on the control of dangerous weapons, which defines a “person” as “individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, association, or any other group or entity, regardless of how it was created.” CA Pen. Code, § 16970. The “regardless of how it was created” would push its application to the Vision.

If the Vision is legally a person, then it is possible for him to be murdered. If he is not a person, then it is destruction of property.

Was Vision’s Murder Legally Justified?

Assuming in arguendo that Vision is legally a person, was Scarlet Witch legally justified to destroy the Mind Stone (and Vision) to keep Thanos from acquiring the final Infinity Stone?

Scarlet Witch could argue the “necessity defense” in that it was necessary to kill the Vision in order to prevent trillions of life forms across the universe from being killed. In order for Scarlet Witch to be able to argue the necessity defense, there had to be no reasonable legal alternatives to violating the law. People v. Galambos 104 Cal.App.4th 1147 (2002). Scarlet Witch would need to show that she had to destroy the Mind Stone 1) to prevent a significant and imminent evil; 2) with no reasonable legal alternative; 3) without creating a greater danger than the one avoided; 4) with a good faith belief that the criminal act was necessary to prevent the greater harm; 5) with such belief being objectively reasonable, and 6) under circumstances in which she did not substantially contribute to the emergency. People v. Kearns 55 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1135 (1997).

The prospect of half of all life in the universe being destroyed would be a “significant and imminent evil” to prevent. Moreover, Scarlet Witch did not have any reasonable alternatives, as Thanos was easily dispensing every hero who faced him. As to the issue of creating a danger greater than the one to be avoid, destroying the Mind Stone and Vision easily tip in favor of saving trillions of lives. Scarlet Witch could have had a good faith belief in her actions, because Thanos had five Infinity Stones and a large army had invaded the Earth. Scarlet Witch objectively could have believed she was doing the right thing and was not contributing to the emergency.

There would be a significant challenge with bringing the necessity defense to destroy the Mind Stone: Necessity is not recognized as a defense to murder. A defendant cannot argue that he killed innocent people to avoid getting himself killed. Delgadillo v. McEwen 2015 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 142003, at *13 (C.D.Cal. Aug. 24, 2015).

If Vision is a person, there really is no valid legal defense for Scarlet Witch killing him. This would require a defense attorney to argue the Vision was not a person, thus Scarlet Witch was merely destroying property in order to prevent a weapon of mass destruction from falling into the hands of an environmental terrorist who wanted to kill trillions.

The concept of trading a life for a life is never a good one, which is why the law rejects the necessity defense as a reason for murder. Scarlet Witch was the only Avenger who was able to hold off Thanos ONE HANDED while destroying the Mind Stone. If Scarlet Witch had directed all of her energy and focus on Thanos and his Infinity Gauntlet, she had the best odds out of all of the Avengers to either destroy the gauntlet or stop Thanos. Alternatively, if Scarlet Witch and Thor had fought Thanos together, both could have landed the kill shot necessary to stop Thanos.

The Avengers should have focused on stopping Thanos, not destroying the Mind Stone. While the team did not know Thor had survived, if they had directed their energies to repairing Vision so he could have been on the battlefield, the conflict could have turned out differently. Instead, they went with a sacrifice play that cost them everything.

Was Dr. Strange Justified Killing a Possessed Man with Black Magic to Stop a Demon?

0

The Doctor Strange story in the 1987 Strange Tales series by Peter Gillis, saw Doctor Strange killing an innocent person with black magic to defend the Earth. Stephen Strange has to compromise his soul in order to defend humanity with a significant body county.

The comic picks up with Doctor Strange’s life going into free fall after defeating Urthona. Strange had to destroy most of his white magic artifacts in order to save his friends Rintrah, Topaz, Wong, and Sara Wolfe. This left the Earth open to attack by ancient evils that had been held at bay by the now destroyed talismans.

A Water Elemental that once ruled the Earth with other ancients attacked Doctor Strange at his mansion. This demon had unleashed a storm that was having extreme effects on New York City, a farm in Ohio with giant worms, and a fishing vessel that had a giant hole ripped in its nets.

The Water Elemental claimed his storm would cause New York City to stop within a day, within a week drown, and within a month, an unstated horror. The demon effectively was threatening a new Great Flood on humanity. Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2, page 9.

doctor_strange_elemental_fight

From Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2, May, 1987. Penciler Chris Warner, Inker Randy Emberlin.
From Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2, May, 1987. Penciler Chris Warner, Inker Randy Emberlin.

The demon possessed a man named Martin Fein. The Elemental told Strange how it possessed Fein and that all of humanity would “scream like poor Martin,” unless Strange stopped the demon. Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2, page 10.

The problem: the only way for Doctor Strange to stop the Water Elemental, thus protect humanity, was to kill Martin Fein.

This…was bad.

New York allows for the physical force on another person if a “defender” reasonably believes force is necessary stop the harm caused by the other person. N.Y. Penal Law § 35.15.

The Water Elemental posed an active threat to all of humanity. New York was flooding, giant worms on the slither, and one soggy demon was beating up Doctor Strange while threatening to drown New York City. These facts objectively show Doctor Strange would be legally justified in destroying the Water Elemental.

Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2.
Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2.

This would also mean killing Martin Fein. While the Water Elemental was the clear and present danger to humanity, Martin Fein was just a person who was possessed. Perhaps if Doctor Strange had been at full power he could have expelled the demon from Fein. However, Strange was not at full power.

The law is silent on the legality of killing a demonically possessed person in order to save humanity. One could argue that Fein was “dead” the moment he was possessed. Moreover, if the Water Elemental was not stopped, everyone in New York City could have died, including Martin Fein.

doctor_strange_destroy_you

The legal analysis is further complicated by the use of “black magic.” According to the Water Elemental, it was originally stopped by bloody human sacrifice. Doctor Strange would have to stray from “the path of purity” to stop the demon. Strange Tales, volume 2, issue 2, page 9.

The law does not allow human sacrifices. Doctor Strange was faced with a mystic “trolley problem,” that would require killing Martin Fein in order to stop demonic trolley from harming others.

A wrongful death case likely would find in favor of Doctor Strange, because of the impossibility of saving Martin Fein from the Water Elemental. On one level, if Fein was already “dead” because of the possession, destroying Fein’s body was like using a corpse to stop a runaway trolley. This is substantially different than using a live person to stop a runaway trolley.

Stopping the Water Elemental by killing Fein could be legally justifiable under the circumstances. However, this is still morally wrong. As the story continued in later issues, Doctor Strange’s “white magic” powers continued to weaken as he increased his use of black magic. Strange paid a price, which we will explore in future blog posts.

Batty Crimes on Gotham

0

The Gotham episode “The Anvil or the Hammer,” taught us the following legal lessons in bad decision making:

The Gotham PD have not read the 4th Amendment. No one gets a search warrant for anything, like searching a suspect’s apartment;

Barbara Kean is either a) an accessory to three murders; b) insane c) both;

The Fox Club has the crimes Professor Whitebread said would NEVER be on a Bar Exam; and

Edward Nigma is a murder.

Riddle Me This: Who Needs a Search Warrant to Enter an Apartment?

Answer: The Police!

Detectives Gordon and Bullock entered the Ogre’s apartment after getting a tip from a prostitute the Ogre maimed nine years earlier. The goal was to save Barbara Kean from the suspected serial killer.

Did the police need to get a warrant? Calling the duty judge would take time in the 24-hour window since Kean’s abduction. The 4th Amendment requires a search warrant for the police to enter someone’s home, unless there are “exigent circumstances.” The threat to Kean’s life arguably was an imminent and ongoing danger to life, so Gordon and Bullock have a strong argument for violating the 4th Amendment.

Is Barbara Batty?

Barbara Kean telling the Ogre to kill her parents does not fall under the necessity defense. You cannot get other people killed to save yourself. That is exactly what Barbara did with her parricide (and butler-cide). There is no question she was the proximate cause of these three murders.

The Ogre was the one who did the actual killing, however, “but for” Barbara telling the Ogre to kill her parents, no murders would have taken place. Barbara’s actions take her from tortured hostage to accessory by the willful targeting of others for death.

Could Barbara argue insanity defense? That she lost her mind from fear? Maybe, but that likely will show she is not competent to stand trial and would spend her time in a state mental hospital.

What Does the Fox Say?

Way back while studying for the California Bar Exam, the great Criminal Law Professor Charles Whitebread said you would never see a bar exam question involving bestiality, buggery, or any other funky sex crime.

Gotham went there.

That will be one surreal arraignment.

FoxClub_Crimes_2081

The Riddler’s Odyssey

Murder does not win the heart of a girl. Edward Nigma laid in wait, confronted an off duty police officer, and stabbed him. Nigma then cut up the body with an ax, took it to the police station, melted it down, and then crushed the bones.

It does not take much of a riddle to see that is murder.

Wayne Enterprises

There is no question Wayne Enterprises is breaking a large number of Federal, state, and international laws. There is a good bet they are also violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, but we do not yet know enough about their business practices to know for sure.