Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

[Lord Liaden]

I was thinking the situation is like the CU's refusal to grant rights to the undead. The legal, ethical and philosophical implications of provable reincarnation would be more profound, complex, and far-reaching than even the abortion debate. I would imagine the courts would just avoid it.

[steriaca]

9 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

I was thinking the situation is like the CU's refusal to grant rights to the undead. The legal, ethical and philosophical implications of provable reincarnation would be more profound, complex, and far-reaching than even the abortion debate. I would imagine the courts would just avoid it.

That is the idea. To stir such questions. But of course, your probably correct.  The courts would find such matters complicated.

 

But that doesn't mean that the mages don't have their own "law". This arrest might open the doors to the magical society inside normal society. Kinda like the Wizarding World has their own law, and society, along with normal society. 

[Sundog]

Problem is, of the non-magical world became aware of "magic law", they'd immediately move to eliminate it, under the doctrine of all being equal under the law.

[Marcus Impudite]

Case 16(?): The Shapeshifter Defense

 

A defendant in a criminal trial pleads not guilty, claiming that a shapeshifter committed the crime while impersonating him. Assuming a world where shapeshifters are well known to exist and that many of them can indeed do convincing imitations of other people, how does one prove or disprove the defendant's claim?

[steriaca]

15 hours ago, Sundog said:

Problem is, of the non-magical world became aware of "magic law", they'd immediately move to eliminate it, under the doctrine of all being equal under the law.

Which is probably why the existence of a magical subsocitey is usually kept secret from us muggles. If magical law is known there is problems of how to subject beings with powers above us to sumit to our laws.

 

Humm...sounds familiar somehow...

2 minutes ago, Marcus Impudite said:

Case 16(?): The Shapeshifter Defense

 

A defendant in a criminal trial pleads not guilty claiming that a shapeshifter committed the crime while impersonating him. Assuming a world were shapeshifters are well known to exist and that many of them can indeed do convincing imitations of other people, how does one prove or disprove the defendant's claim?

Questioning the accused on facts only he could know. Which may be problematic if we account other powers exist also.

[FireTiger]

For a game reference that's a bit long-in-the-tooth:  "The Superhero and the Legal System" - Adventurers Club - Issue # 12 - pp. 8–22 - Summer 1988

 

It covered (briefly):

• Precedent
• Legal Sanction
  • Private Citizen
  • Vigilante
  • Special Deputy
• The Legal Process
  • Determination of a Crime
  • Investigation
  • Arrest
  • Booking
  • Initial Appearance
  • Preliminary Hearing
  • Grand Jury or Information
  • Arraignment
  • Trial
    • Subpoena
    • Jury Duty
    • Testimony
    • Resolution
  • Sentencing
• The Law and Secret IDs
  • Losing the Secret ID
  • Masks and Code-Names
  • Proving Identity
• Special Problems
  • Liability
  • Heroes Using the Legal System
  • Disadvantages

 

 

[unclevlad]

On 10/14/2022 at 6:33 PM, Marcus Impudite said:

Case 16(?): The Shapeshifter Defense

 

A defendant in a criminal trial pleads not guilty, claiming that a shapeshifter committed the crime while impersonating him. Assuming a world where shapeshifters are well known to exist and that many of them can indeed do convincing imitations of other people, how does one prove or disprove the defendant's claim?

 

I think it's impossible to prove it unless the shifter gets caught.  The defense's objective would be to show it could not be the defendant.

A telepath with the ability to do a complete memory trace would be one solution.

Another would be someone with the absolute power to detect lies.  Wearing the Cape built one;  his name was Veritas.  His power was off the charts...he could detect lies over the phone, for example.  

 

The larger question is how shifters would impact alibi laws.  Because the shifter could do just as well, impersonating the criminal in order to provide a "rock solid" alibi.  Something of a similar issue arises with a duplicator, particularly if the duplication power is NOT known.  That's been a theme in occasional mystery novels...the unknown twin.

 

 

[death tribble]

Caution Mature topic.

 

Back in the mid 70s the authorities found out that a mentalist mastermind was impregnating women in order to breed a super race in order to dominate and destroy all governments and societies. The panic this generated culminated in the United Nations passing a resolution which stated that a paranormal who committed rape would be subject to an execution order. These orders would have to be passed by the UN Security Council in order to stop sovereign governments from identifying a paranormal they did not like and summarily executing them. Governments signed up to this because the thought of overthrow specifically by a foreign mastermind breeding an army on their population was abhorrent. Only rogue nations failed to ratify it. It as felt that while one country or its law enforcement system might be swayed you could not do that to the world's representatives. Particularly as the UN has some of the best mental protection in the world.

 

Later a case came up where a normal raped a paranormal. The point was raised that a paranormal should be protected in the same way as the normal population and that they might be unable to save lives or be killed in action due to the trauma of the assault (Or they might go on a rampage). The UN decided that this was a valid concern and that the Security Council again could bring execution orders on normals who raped a paranormal.

 

It is possible for a country to abstain from having someone 'gunned down' or otherwise executed on their territory but if they cross into another country all bets are off. That includes the embassies of countries as well.

 

Abortion is now the recommended course of action in all cases as the mentalists surviving children were all allowed to live and became evil in their right. All died.

However with the change of law in the States prohibiting abortion a paranormal could insist that his progeny be allowed to live even as he is executed. Similarly someone who rapes a paranormal could insist that they have their child while attempting to dodge execution.

 

The executioners are regulated by the United Nations.

 

Thoughts ?

[Grailknight]

On 10/19/2022 at 1:00 PM, death tribble said:

Caution Mature topic.

 

Back in the mid 70s the authorities found out that a mentalist mastermind was impregnating women in order to breed a super race in order to dominate and destroy all governments and societies. The panic this generated culminated in the United Nations passing a resolution which stated that a paranormal who committed rape would be subject to an execution order. These orders would have to be passed by the UN Security Council in order to stop sovereign governments from identifying a paranormal they did not like and summarily executing them. Governments signed up to this because the thought of overthrow specifically by a foreign mastermind breeding an army on their population was abhorrent. Only rogue nations failed to ratify it. It as felt that while one country or its law enforcement system might be swayed you could not do that to the world's representatives. Particularly as the UN has some of the best mental protection in the world.

 

Later a case came up where a normal raped a paranormal. The point was raised that a paranormal should be protected in the same way as the normal population and that they might be unable to save lives or be killed in action due to the trauma of the assault (Or they might go on a rampage). The UN decided that this was a valid concern and that the Security Council again could bring execution orders on normals who raped a paranormal.

 

It is possible for a country to abstain from having someone 'gunned down' or otherwise executed on their territory but if they cross into another country all bets are off. That includes the embassies of countries as well.

 

Abortion is now the recommended course of action in all cases as the mentalists surviving children were all allowed to live and became evil in their right. All died.

However with the change of law in the States prohibiting abortion a paranormal could insist that his progeny be allowed to live even as he is executed. Similarly someone who rapes a paranormal could insist that they have their child while attempting to dodge execution.

 

The executioners are regulated by the United Nations.

 

Thoughts ?

 

There is so much wrong with this  that it's difficult bring up all the implications.

 

First off as rape is already illegal the crime that triggers this is the intent to breed  an army on unwilling victims.  Of course that's illegal. But would that mean that a government or private project to do the same with volunteers would be acceptable? "Have Super Kids for the Nation's Future" suddenly become a worldwide debate and a new arms race begins( Or just becomes public, you can bet that many countries already have these projects going clandestinely.) What about a project with donated eggs or sperm?

 

Secondly, it doesn't matter if the criminal or the victim is normal or paranormal, you are making an international law that says that rape that results in pregnancy is a death penalty offense. I can't see anybody being happy with this except stockholders in DNA testing labs. Victim's rights groups will cry for it to apply to all rapes and defense advocates will argue that this is excessive. Can you imagine the crapstorm that will happen when a female mentalist is found guilty of raping a man to get pregnant by him against his will? What should the penalty be for false accusations? Would it be  attempted murder?

 

Next what happens when a more reactionary country executes a "rapist" before the exonerating DNA results are in? Not usually an issue in countries with drawn out appeals processes but that's not the case in all member nations of the U.N.

 

I'll stop here though. The abortion debates centered around predestined evil are a political, religious and moral sewer that I don't care to contemplate.   

[Lord Liaden]

On 10/14/2022 at 8:33 PM, Marcus Impudite said:

Case 16(?): The Shapeshifter Defense

 

A defendant in a criminal trial pleads not guilty, claiming that a shapeshifter committed the crime while impersonating him. Assuming a world where shapeshifters are well known to exist and that many of them can indeed do convincing imitations of other people, how does one prove or disprove the defendant's claim?

 

In the United States, a criminal charge may be dismissed if the defendant can show reasonable doubt that they committed the crime they're accused of. "Reasonable" is the operative word. The mere existence of shape-shifters is no more excuse than the existence of disguise artists. I would say that at minimum, the defendant would have to conclusively show that a shape-shifter exists with the means and motivation to commit the crime and frame the defendant for it, most likely an enemy, preferably with a history of having done the same to someone before.

[Clonus]

On 10/14/2022 at 6:33 PM, Marcus Impudite said:

Case 16(?): The Shapeshifter Defense

 

A defendant in a criminal trial pleads not guilty, claiming that a shapeshifter committed the crime while impersonating him. Assuming a world where shapeshifters are well known to exist and that many of them can indeed do convincing imitations of other people, how does one prove or disprove the defendant's claim?

 

One can create reasonable doubt by establishing that the defendant was ever seen in two different places at the same time.  Ideally at the time of the crime.  The court is not going to just assume it was a shapeshifter in the absence of any indication that there was a shapeshifter with a motive available to stab Mr Boddhi.   

[Lord Liaden]

Assuming that (a) the shape-shifter was sloppy enough to do this when the subject of his frame was around witnesses; (b) that the accused super has no known means of extremely fast travel. Superman or Flash, for example, could be on the other side of the planet in seconds.

[steriaca]

If the above shapeshifter actually wants his crimes shifted to who he is impersonating, he must first...

 

...do his crime in front of people who knows who he is impersonating...

 

...make sure who he is impersonating is out of the way enough that someone can't say "he was with me at that time"...

 

...that the impersonation doesn't have any powers he doesn't possess or can mimic (why isn't Doctor Phantom phasing into the wall to get away?)...

 

And prehaps more I'm not thinking of. 

[unclevlad]

The shape-shifter question is explicitly covered here:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Law-Superheroes-James-Daily/dp/1592407269

 

This is actually a tremendous book to show the underpinnings of the legal system.  The writers are lawyers, and they're arguing from real case law.  Granted, no, superpowers aren't directly equivalent, but they use analogous situations.  When is telepathy...or for that matter, potentially, even just empathy...an illegal search?  Would heroes be allowed to testify while wearing a mask, or would this violate due process?  It's detailed, nit-picking, deep stuff...but I'm loving it.  About 2/3 of the way through at this point.

[steriaca]

Reminds me of the CBG articals titled "The Law Is An Ass", the title based on a Shakespeare quote, and has a real life lawyer looking at various law cases in comic books. 

[DoctorImpossible]

This thread is making me think of all those silly "grim-dark" iron-age comics about the US government either controlling, or trying to take control of, the superheroes, and I think all the violence, hero on hero conflicts, and "cool" but actually a very boringly unoriginal plots will actually play out.

 

All manner of minor crime-waves rise up as slightly less driven hero supers decide not to bother if the government itself has turned on a hero population. The more potent simply ignore the laws and then a bunch of cops/government agents have to decide if obedience to the law is worth getting killed, beaten, or even just mind-wiped, all for the "crime" of saving people from that hurricane or whatever. Then, with the politically powerful and/or rich heroes, there's a lot of simply law not applying to them anyway. The monarchs of foreign nations, the people who donate trillions to the same cops you'd be trying to get to arrest this person, maybe even God/The Devil/An Anthropic Personification Of An Eternal Concept, are all going to be above and beyond any such jurisdiction.

[Lord Liaden]

OTOH you can look at the People's Republic of China in the Champions Universe, which requires all citizens with significant superhuman power to serve the government, willingly or not, on pain of imprisonment or even death. Even if their actions are traditionally heroic, they face the same penalties for unsanctioned super activities. For supers who try to defy Chinese law, the government has the 50+ members of the Tiger Squad, world's largest hero team, to enforce it.

[DShomshak]

Suspicion of the US government is as old as the republic itself, so there's a certain tradition here. But yeah, the 56th time the threat ultimately turns out to be a Sinister Government Agency, whether rogue or sanctioned at the highest levels, that apparently never has to worry about its budget, oversight, public opinion or legal consequence of exposure, well, my eyes roll at the triteness of it all.

 

The Iron Age didn't invent the trope, either, but writers of that time sure leaned into it.

 

Dean Shomshak

[death tribble]

This relates to the Stronghold book and the lack of rights of the undead.

 

 Villain of the week escapes conviction during a trial and mocks the police and judiciary for their treatment of him. One of the heroes then says he bought his way of trouble and coerced the jury/witnesses.

The villain sues for libel and slander as the media reported what was said only for the law to point out that the hero insulting them was a vampire and as undead cannot be prosecuted as a no-citizen. Also the papers and media were only reporting what was said so they were covered and the villain has no recourse. Am I reading that right ? 

[Lord Liaden]

Not necessarily. Defamation (slander or libel) is not a crime under the federal law of the United States, hence there would be no "prosecution" in federal court under any circumstances. Some states have criminalized defamation, but that would require the state to file a charge, and I can't see any interest by the state in supporting the villain's complaint.

 

Defamation is actionable in civil court, however. I don't foresee a bar to the villain suing the vampire "hero" for defamation because he's not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, which applies to protection of due process in government legal cases, not cases between private individuals.

 

However, I must note that your description of the scenario implies some additional salient considerations. First, that he made those statements and his undead status was raised, implies that the hero is publicly known, and it's also publicly known that he's a vampire. It's unlikely that he could function in such a position if he had no status under the law. Note that individual states can grant whatever additional rights they choose within their jurisdiction under their own constitutions, that don't contradict federal law. So a state could grant "personhood" to the undead if its government so chose. It could also be possible for the federal government to grant legal protections to a specific known hero in recognition of their service to the public. The Champions US government grants specific protections and powers to heroes who are officially sanctioned by the government.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Lord Liaden

[megaplayboy]

"Superhuman Law" would likely have 2 or 3 courses associated with it, and there might also be legal coursework around extraterrestrial beings and organizations, "magic", artificial intelligences and so forth.  The first 20-30 years following the appearance of any of this stuff is likely to be a muddled mess, legally.

[death tribble]

The Stronghold source book covers some of this if you have not seen it. I think also we covered something related to the status of undead etc earlier in the thread so I'll go back and quote it for here. 

[Lord Liaden]

Yeah, I myself have gone over this particular issue a number of times in different places, here and on other forums. Thing is, the scenarios postulated in those discussions have invariably involved someone going after vampires to kill them, and whether they would face any criminal charges for doing so. As I mentioned, your scenario implies a very different situation.

[DShomshak]

No legal eagle here, but it occurs to me that lawsuits do not have to target actual persons, nor be brought on behalf of actual persons. Corporations have only a legal fiction of quasi-personhood, but they get sued all the time. And environmental laws have resulted in lawyers bringing suits on behalf of rivers, forests, and other natural phenomena on the grounds that human activities have damaged them. So even if undead (or nature spirits, or whatever) are not legal persons, they still might be subject to civil law and use it themselves. -Just to add another layer of complication.

 

In the litigation-prone US, at least, judges and legislators might not want to open the cans of worms implied by super-powers and nonhuman intelligences, but lawyers will probably force them to do so. If for no other reasons, lawyers with a hunger for publicity would probably try bringing test cases to see if some existing law or precedent could be contorted to fit the situation.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

 

So, can a superhero be charged for crimes his past self committed?

 

 

Death ends all legal action against a person.  The person is considered to no longer be a person, and hence not liable to any legal action or penalty.  Mind you, this used to be different: John Knox was dug up and his body burned at the stake after his death, for example.  But today its a dead end legally.

 

In a world where people can come back as another being, or be resurrected, or whatever would have to come up with its own system of law to handle such an event.  I can tell you what individual religions think about this, but even if you take the tales of this kind of thing happening seriously, they are usually so rare and specific as to avoid legal consideration. 

 

Take the Bible, for instance.  In roughly five thousand years of Biblical history, there were ten people recorded as having been brought back from the dead.  That's so rare as to be outside general legal consideration.  If it happened more often (as in, say, Hinduism with nearly everyone being reincarnated) then it would have to be considered based on the case or person.  Nobody is immediately reincarnated into a human again in Hinduism (as I understand it).  They are either downgraded to something slightly lower than humans or something higher on their hierarchy of beings.  I believe humans are pretty low on the list.  Animals are held to be outside legal consideration by just about everyone: you cannot sue your dog for chewing up the furniture.

 

Just some thoughts from a non-lawyer.

Edited November 9, 2023 by Christopher R Taylor