|
|
Join us each Tuesday as Bob Ingersoll analyzes how the law
is portrayed in comics then explains how it would really work.
Current Installment >>
Installment Archives |
About Bob |
General Forum
THE LAW IS A ASS for 07/17/2001
DOCKET ENTRY
"The Law is a Ass" Installment # 104
Originally written as installment # 93 and published in Comics Buyer's Guide issue # 680, November 28, 1986 issue
I mention the biographical joke in this column. I explained the biographical joke in an old column; how I write a short, humorous bit about myself at the end of the column explaining who I am and why I'm qualified to write this column. You may have noticed that the biographical joke doesn't appear all the time in these column reprints. That's because I frequently take them out.
Usually, it's because the joke involved is dated; tied into a specific time and referencing a specific comic or event that is so past us now that I'd have to devote column space just to explaining the joke. So rather than do that, I simply take the joke out.
Believe me, it's easier that way.
For example, this column's ending joke works only if you remember that after the success of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles virtually every comic publishing company extant brought out a quickie surrogate such as Pre-Teen, Dirty-Gene, Kung-Fu Kangaroos and Adolescent, Radioactive, Black Belt Hamsters. And some comic-book publishing companies which weren't extant came into business to publish their own versions. See, I had to explain it with a history lesson. Taking it out would have been easier.
Sometimes I take the biographical joke out, because, upon re-reading it, I realize that it really wasn't funny in the first place. One of those, it's late and it seems funny, so, what the hell, go with that joke kind of things. As I said, I take these jokes out, because they're not funny.
Believe me, it's less embarrassing that way.
******
"The Law is a Ass"
Installment # 104
by
Bob Ingersoll
Mail call!
Before I do anything else, I have to thank Randy Freeman of Riverside, California. Not only is Randy one of my biggest supporters--and despite that fact, they still let Randy into public shopping malls!--not only does he send me lots of letters with questions and old comics for my column, but now he's sending gifts. Randy's gone above and beyond the call here, folks. So, the biographical joke in this column is one Randy sent me. In other words, in order to give Randy a proper thank you, I'm giving him something I never give anyone else, the last word.
Steve Coyle of Centerville, Virginia wants me to write about the recent Abigail Cable trial in Saga of the Swamp Thing # 47, 51, 52, and 53. That's where she was being tried for "Crimes Against Nature" for having sex with the Swamp Thing. Okay, Steve, I'm writing.
First, let me say there is a Louisiana crime called "Crimes Against Nature," which forbids sexual activity with animals. I looked it up. Steve seems to think that Abby couldn't have committed the crime, because in the only sex scene shown, Abby was only naked from the waist up and the only evidence the court saw was pictures of Abby and Swamp Thing bathing together. There are two fallacious assumptions that Steve has made here.
Sexual activity is possible, even if the female is dressed below the waist. I'm not going to describe how it can be done, or how I know. Just take my word for it, it can be done.
Second, Steve, how do you know that the only evidence the judge saw was photographs of Swamp Thing and Abby bathing? Yes, those were the only photographs we saw in the comic, but as I interpreted the scene, Abby and Swamp Thing went farther. The creators of the comic simply chose not to show the other pictures, because this was a Code book.
Also, Abby wasn't actually on trial. The procedure shown was a preliminary hearing, in which the court had to determine whether there was probable cause that Abby had committed the crime--that is whether it were more probable than not that she committed the crime charged. The judge only had to find probable cause that Abby committed the crime, he didn't have to find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That's a significantly reduced standard, which I think the evidence shown supported.
Finally, part of the point of the story line was that Abby was the victim of small town narrow-mindedness and bigotry. (Small towns of America, please don't unite. I'm not accusing you of narrow-mindedness or bigotry. I'm saying that the small town depicted in the story was guilty of those crimes.) As such, the judicial proceedings to which Abby was subjected were the functional equivalent of a witch hunt or kangaroo court. In this context, the judge's actions were not incorrect at all.
Jolyon Silversmith of Rockville, Maryland wrote me about the September 13th episode of Pound Puppies. He wanted to know if the evil, old aunt could really take over the little girl's puppy pound, because the girl hadn't paid her electric bill. I didn't see it, so I don't know how the evil old aunt could take over the little girl's puppy pound, just because the girl hadn't paid her electric bill. I'm still trying to figure out how the electric company could get away with sending a bill to a minor child.
Casey Cooke of Patuxent River, Maryland wanted to know how mutants could be so abused in Marvel books without the American Civil Liberties Union breathing down the abusers' necks. I can't answer this one either. I agree with Casey, if I were a mutant and I started getting the kind of abuse that we've seen recently, I'd head for the nearest ACLU branch and file the biggest discrimination suit ever seen. I don't know why the various Marvel Mutant writers don't have their characters, currently the victims of something called the "Mutant Massacre," do the same thing. Congratulations, Casey, you're smarter than the average mutant.
Paul Lukacs of Cleveland, Ohio (home of some of the nicest people I know) wants to know if criminals on the run can turn themselves in and collect the reward for information leading to the arrest of said fugitives. I think so. Recently, some states, like Illinois, bothered by the fact that criminals make fortunes by writing books about their crimes, have passed statutes making it illegal for criminals to profit from their crimes. Under these statues all royalties from such books go into a victims' relief fund. These so-called "Son of Sam" laws are on the books. Granted, courts frequently strike them down as violating the First Amendment rights of the criminals and the publishers by making it less likely they will sell manuscripts, but legislatures are still trying to figure out ways to keep convicted criminals from doing this sort of thing.
I know it has happened that fugitives have collected the rewards on themselves. Nevertheless, I don't recommend this. There are easier ways of earning money.
Charles Ehrenpreis of Denver, Colorado has a question about "Ace 2" from this year's Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man Annual. Actually, he had a question about"Ace" from last year's Peter Parker, the Spectacular Spider-Man Annual, he just used "Ace 2" as an excuse for asking it. He asked, if an innocent bystander were killed during a gang rumble, could the police prosecute all of the participants in the rumble or only the actual trigger man. They could prosecute everyone for murder. All of them caused a death, while committing another crime. Even if not everyone in the rumble intended to kill the bystander, that a bystander might be struck by a stray bullet from the rumble and killed was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of their act of spraying bullets about willie nillie. That would be enough of a mens rea to convict the participants of felony murder.
Charles also said he doesn't want me to write about the law in TV, as this would eat up all my time and prevent me from writing about comics. However, he did have a question about Foley Square. (Whoa, crossed signals here, Chas.) In this show a pickpocket is arrested, arraigned, granted bail, skips bail, is arrested on new charges and repeats the whole process several times. Charles wants to know if someone who skips bail is entitled to bail a second time?
Yes. The Eight Amendment to the Constitution says everyone is entitled to bail. But it also says bail can be set higher for people who are a risk of either flight or new crimes. Sometimes, a judge might refuse bail to such a recidivist under the theory that he poses too great a threat of future crime, but that's a judgment call and not required. The judge can still find the Constitution permits these people bail. What usually happens with such people is that each time they come in, the successive bail is higher, because the person is a definite threat to run. By the time a third or fourth bail is set only H. J. Hunt could afford the accumulated bails.
John Jones of Hayden Lake, Indiana wants to know if it was legal for Peter Gyrnich to have the Avengers' powers removed hypnotically, after they had been arrested for treason in Avengers Annual # 15. The authorities are permitted to take certain steps in order to keep persons they've arrested in custody. The only limit on said steps is that they cannot constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Hypnotizing the Avengers so that they couldn't use their powers to escape is unusual, but it isn't cruel. It's perfectly valid.
To answer your other question, John, no charging the Batman with child endangerment for placing Robin at risk isn't a bogus charge, not even if Robin was a willing participant. The theory on child endangerment is that adults are supposed to know better than children and are not supposed to put them into jeopardy, even if the children ask for it. Besides, I'd rather put a child in Who Wants to be a Millionaire? than in Jeopardy, the pay off's bigger.
Jay Hadley of Campton, New Hampshire wants to know if police can check under a man's coat, when they suspect that he's hiding weapons under them. If the police have a reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts that a person is armed and dangerous, they may stop and frisk a person in the street. Don't ask me what a reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts is, the courts and criminal defense attorneys are still fighting over this one.
Gary Regier of Springfield, Missouri wants to know why S.H.I.E.L.D. offered to help Captain America beat the rap for killing a terrorist in Captain America # 323, if Cap would rejoin that counterintelligence agency. Gary felt that as Cap shot the terrorist, to keep him from machine gunning innocent victims, that should be self-defense. It's certainly self-defense in my book, Gary, because self-defense includes defending one's self and defending others. But this shooting took place in Switzerland. Maybe the Swiss are so neutral they don't recognize the self-defense defense. Any Swiss readers out there, who can Alp us with our question?
Finally, I wanted to thank Larry Schultz of Springville, New York for his kind words. Don't worry, Larry, I'm not really afraid of hate mail, when I wrote I'd only do columns about old comics so that I wouldn't get any hate mail, I was just pretending I was afraid for a joke. On the other hand, that doesn't mean I'm openly soliciting hate mail either. One's psyche can take only so much.
Larry also compared my column to Jason from the Friday the 13th movies. "You stalk a poorly thought out story. Slowly analyzing its flaws and weaknesses... THEN YOU JUMP ON IT AND TEAR IT APART!!! HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!! SO SIC 'EM, BOB! KILL, MAIM, PILLAGE AND DESTROY!!!"
******
BOB INGERSOLL, lawyer and CBG analyst is forming a new football league. Each team will consist of a different set of genetically- altered, martial artist animals. There shouldn't be any trouble finding teams for the future expansion drafts.
<< 07/10/2001 | 07/17/2001 | 07/24/2001 >>
Discuss this installment with me in World Famous Comics' General Forum.
Recent Installments:
Current Installment >>
Installment Archives |
About Bob |
General Forum
|
|
|
Anything Goes Trivia
