DrumsGoBang
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
DrumsGoBang - Bang Bang
Posts: 910
|
Post by DrumsGoBang on Oct 6, 2005 13:58:17 GMT -5
The Fortress of Soiltude is in the Artic circle, and is probably part of Canada. Canada cannot have a formal diplomatic realtionship with the government of Kypton, since it doesn't exsist anymore, hence they cannot have an embassy on Canadian soil. Superman needs to be tried in Canada, not the USA. The USA might want to extradite him for taking the law into his own hands and flying without FAA approval.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2005 14:38:41 GMT -5
This is.... without a doubt...
Best. Thread. Ever.
|
|
DrumsGoBang
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
DrumsGoBang - Bang Bang
Posts: 910
|
Post by DrumsGoBang on Oct 6, 2005 15:14:20 GMT -5
I bet you could put Batman away for what he did to Robin too. We all know what he did to Robin.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Oct 6, 2005 15:26:40 GMT -5
My thoughts on Superman's citizenship et. al. : 1) Presuming Jack McCoy were prosecuting The Man Of Steel, my guess is he'd find out about his dual-identity as Clark Kent (with a little help from Lenny Briscoe). In that case, the argument would likely center on the fact that Clark Kent is a US citizen (pays taxes, into Social Security, has a diver's license, likely some sort of birth certificate doctored by his Earth parents, has a residence he pays property taxes on, etc.). If Kent is a US citizen, so is Superman ("People of the State of NY v. Clark Kent aka Superman" for example). So there's jurisdiction. 2) Zod was, in fact, a general - and one who posed a clear and present danger to the USA. Enemy combatant, terrorist, whatever you call him, a bad guy I doubt Superman would get prosecuted for killing. I'm not sure it matters his powers being gone matters. Think of it this way: say Al Qaeda comes out tomorrow and says "we give up, we're ceasing all hostilities." But then three weeks later Bin Laden is walking down the street in Anytown USA, when Joe Citizen runs up to him, beats the hell out of him, and kills him. You think a case could be made that he was no longer a threat? Knowing Zod better than anyone, I'm sure Superman was of the belief that even without his powers Zod would go to great lengths to enslave Earth - especially since he'd teamed up (somewhat) with Lex Luthor. If that were the argument presented to me using any "reasonable person" legal standard, I'd have to find for Son Of Jor-El. And I don't think that even if a murder DID occur in the Fortress of Solitude any American court would maintain jurisdiction over it. Isn't the traditional language something along the lines of "his Fortress of Solitude at the North Pole" or something to that effect? If its on some ice shelf or other geologic formation, could we somehow apply international maritime law to the situation? Like if a crime were committed in Antarctica? If it were in Alaska or Canada that's a different ballgame... 3) Can someone give specifics on the deaths again? I remember the power-reversal moment, but I thought the three were thrown back into that weird trapezoidal prison-like thing and flung back into outerspace? 4) Worst Film Ever = Superman 4 with Jon Cryer ("Woaaahhh.... Uncle Lex!") 2) Are you suggesting that Superman would be charged with Manslaughter as opposed to murder? Interesting. Clearly by bringing in the Reasonable Person Standard and questions of provocation you are attempting to mount a defense that limits the possible conviction to manslaughter. I think I agree with you. It will be tough to get Superman for murder. Manslaughter requires: Intent to kill + provocation/heat of passion or High risk act + Gross Negligence Questions Discussed: Provocation: Provocation need not be a single action or attack. It can be a series of cumulative events that have built up and cause the defendant to act rashly. Clearly, Zod threatening the human race and Superman's life and those of his loved ones can be considered a provocation. Superman clearly was in a heat of passion and merely reacting to the actions of Zod. Cultural Circumstances: There are a growing number of decisions where the cultural background of the defendent could play a role. For example, if Superman felt culturally obligated to kill because of a different value system, this may knock the possible conviction down to manslaughter. Cooling Off Period: While you could argue that Superman had a moment to reflect after Zod was helpless, there really wasn't much time for him to consider the ramifications. 1st Degree Murder requires: Intent to kill + malice aforethought + premeditation + deliberation That would be a bitch to show. While we can definitely show that Superman had an intent to kill and there is some evidence of premeditation (not time requirement for how long someone needs to premeditate an act) and deliberation (I think he knew what he was doing when he acted), there are serious issues because of the above mentioned provocation. In effect, that provocation will limit the malice. Also, the method of killing raises questions of heat of passion furthering the lack of malice. However, perhaps the killing of an enemy officer is statutory grounds for 1st degree...much like killing a police officer or a prison guard. 2nd Degree Murder requires: Intent to kill + malice aforethought or wanton disregard Difficult If Superman is to be convicted of murder, this is the only shot at it. However, in order to do that the prosecution is going to have to overcome the overwhelming evidence of provocation and heat of passion. Very tough considering the Jury will owe their lives and freedom to Superman's actions.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Oct 6, 2005 15:38:10 GMT -5
I said the question was moot before because no one could prove that Zod was dead.
I stand by that, but OK, fine.
I still say the question is moot because -- as we all know -- Superman and the whole JLA are going to buy the farm in the INFINITE CRISIS.
And good riddance to them too. The only real heroes are Marvel heroes.
Yeah, that's right. You want to amp up the geek factor on this thread??? I give you....DC vs. Marvel comics!!
So, unless someone wants to throw some 12- & 20-sided dice or trading cards, I'll retire now confident in my status as biggest board loser.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Oct 6, 2005 15:47:42 GMT -5
Boz, I think the law school nerds here trump the comic book nerds. As soon as you start citing the cultural circumstances argument for manslaughter, you know you are a law student who thinks he is hilarious because he knows stupid stuff, like when I started talking about Tony Graffanino as the but-for cause of the Sox loss last night, but not necessarily the proximate cause. At that point, I was open to ridicule and scorn, and quite frankly, that's all you need.
|
|
FormerHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by FormerHoya on Oct 6, 2005 16:30:44 GMT -5
He he
Law School is for Sucks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2005 18:50:00 GMT -5
What about us comic book loving law students?
Marvel CRUSHES D.C. Comics and the JLA Edited every day of the freakin' week.
Well, except for Batman... I got a spot in my heart for the superheros who don't have any special powers. Batman, Punisher, etc.
Come to think of it, DC's got the Watchmen, too. Alan Moore is god. So its not a TOTAL whitewash...
|
|
|
Post by Frank Black on Oct 6, 2005 19:30:01 GMT -5
"If Superman is to be convicted of murder, this is the only shot at it. However, in order to do that the prosecution is going to have to overcome the overwhelming evidence of provocation and heat of passion. Very tough considering the Jury will owe their lives and freedom to Superman's actions."
Okay, I think if you actually watch the murders you'll see that premeditation is in fact not at all difficult to prove. Superman was well aware that his scheme would result in the enfeeblement of his adversaries. And his manner is at all times cool and collected, there was no passion we he threw Zod against the ice wall. He was on the contrary quite pleased with himself. And a jury might hold him to a higher standard which, by definition one could argue, he is subject to. His name is SUPERMAN.
Let me emphasize that regardless of the legal case against him, which I think is quite strong assuming you can handle the jurisdicional question marks (note: I am not a lawyer), the MORAL case against him is overwhelming. Zod, a tyrant to be sure, was summarily put to death without due process. Even the NAZIS got due process. Are we Americans here on this board? I can't believe how many murder apologists there are here.
|
|
|
Post by FHillsNYHoya on Oct 7, 2005 15:24:27 GMT -5
Speaking as a former criminal prosecutor, there's no way Superman goes down even if you put him on trial. It's called jury nullification. He'd be acquitted faster than William Kennedy Smith was, and I don't think he'd even need Roy Black.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Oct 8, 2005 21:09:52 GMT -5
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,453
|
Post by TC on Oct 10, 2005 20:35:59 GMT -5
Assuming that the trial takes place within the American legal system, how would one construct a jury of Superman's peers?
|
|
|
Post by Frank Black on Oct 10, 2005 21:17:40 GMT -5
It would indeed be ironic if you had to have Zod, Ursa and Non on the jury. Oh wait, they're dead. You'd have to do the best you could I suppose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2005 22:40:56 GMT -5
Yeah those sissy Justice Leaguers (and any other DC Comics jerks... minus Batman) would get eliminated at voir dier... too close a relation to Superman. Maybe as a compromise between the prosecution and the defense, you could throw the following jury together:
For The Prosecution: Doctor Doom, Dr. Octopus, The Sandman, Magneto, Titanium Man
For The Defense: Spiderman, Sue Storm, The Hulk, Iron Man, Silver Surfer
Swing Jurors: The Punisher, The Thing
|
|
tgo
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 799
|
Post by tgo on Oct 11, 2005 9:43:36 GMT -5
first of all batman sucks!
i always hated batman, he is just a spoiled rich kid with a bunch of nerdy high priced toys. he didnt even make his own money, he inherited it, he would be a little more likable if he was a self made man but he would still be a dork. i would take gleek and the wonder twins over batman any day!
isnt the punisher just bernard getz on steroids btw?
another note, no one has mentioned the role of testimony in whether or not Superman would be convicted. Would Lois turn states' evidence to save her self from prison time? She should be up on manslaughter or something as well right? at least she could claim heat of the moment and self defense, superman knew exactly what he was doing the entire time. I doubt she would testify. Lex Luther has plenty of charges he would like to bargain away, but how credible of a witness would he be? with no bodies and no witnesses and a defendent that is the most popular man on the planet, what DA would touch this case?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2005 10:36:02 GMT -5
Oh c'mon, tgo! Batman's the man! Doesn't need any super-powers, just kicks ass and takes names!! As for Frank Castiglione (aka The Punisher), he's more Count of Monte Cristo than Bernard Goetz. Good point on Lex Luthor - but his credibility is an issue for the jury to take up. Also, if Superman were really on trial, I'm sure one of those sissy Justice Leaguers would pull off jury intimidation that would make even Russian mobsters proud.
|
|