She-Hulk 26, is this really finding heroism? Spoilers

[Mark_S]

So Jen spends most of the book bumbling and stumbling her way through a fight. Ok, that happens. But at the end Tanya has a gun on the guy who murdered her. She'll never see her kids again, she's about to die in her husbands arms. The guy who did this to her has no regrets. So Jen steps in front of the guy? This is the last chance Tanya will have for any sort of justice in her life and Jen says no? Why? So that her principles can be served and Cazon can go on smirking and the badoon can collect his bounty? That's great for her, Cazon and Kodor but what about Tanya and her husband and kids?

Mark_S

[Michael P]

Well, what about them? It's not like killing Cazon is going to bring her back. It's also not like she's interested in justice; it's quite clear all she wants is revenge, which ain't the same thing.

I'd also add that, as Jen notes, letting Tanya kill Cazon would make the last thing she ever did be murder. Should Larry have to live with that knowledge? Should their kids?

And hey, Jen herself questions whether it's really the right thing to do, and probably will be doing so for some time. It's not like this is presented as a morally unambiguous situation.

[Mark_S]

So the last thing she would ever do would be to kill the man who killed her? Would that really have been so bad? Doesn't she have the right to hurt someone who killed her?

Mark_S

[Push You Down]

Revenge is not justice. Confusing the two can be dangerous.

[Drdmx]

Revenge is not justice. Confusing the two can be dangerous.

Pretty much all that need be said.

[Michael P]

So the last thing she would ever do would be to kill the man who killed her? Would that really have been so bad? Doesn't she have the right to hurt someone who killed her?

Mark_S

Well, that's the question, innit? Does anyone ever have the right to hurt anyone?

[Mark_S]

Revenge is not justice. Confusing the two can be dangerous.

In ordinary circumstances I would agree. But in this case Tanya had only moments to live and her killer was standing there smirking. She'd actually been brought back to life after he killed her. Would it really have been vengeance on her part to kill him? Didn't she deserve something in those last moments? And why did Jen have the right to decide she shouldn't have a choice?

Mark_S

[Mark_S]

Well, that's the question, innit? Does anyone ever have the right to hurt anyone?

If someone cuts off my arm I think I have the right to hit him with the arm I have left.

Mark_S

[Radioactive Zombie]

And violence begets violence...

[Michael P]

If someone cuts off my arm I think I have the right to hit him with the arm I have left.

Mark_S

But after you hit him, doesn't he have the right to cut off that arm as well? After all, you hit him with it.

[Dr. Chaos]

Is that skrull friend of her's dead after all?

Please say yes.

[Michael P]

Is that skrull friend of her's dead after all?

Please say yes.

Nope. Not only is Jazinda alive, she kills Cazon right after She-Hulk stops Tanya from doing it.

[Mark_S]

But after you hit him, doesn't he have the right to cut off that arm as well? After all, you hit him with it.

Not if he started it.

Mark_S

[mattbib]

Decent issue, though the book's got a very weird vibe...like there's an off-kilter balance between the title's seriousness and She-Hulk's humor. A lot of the panels and dialogue just seemed out of place or inappropriate.

Looking forward to Jen returning to true superheroing and Jazinda's role, if any, in Secret Invasion.

[Monty_Cristo]

And violence begets violence...

a stitch in time will save you nine!


If someone cuts off my arm I think I have the right to hit him with the arm I have left.

Mark_S

that i can agree to. but i think it would be wrong to beat him to death with said-arm.

[ivesaidway2much]

that i can agree to. but i think it would be wrong to beat him to death with said-arm.Yeah, I agree. I think if you're going to beat someone to death with an arm, it should be their own.

[Stark Supporter]

So Jen spends most of the book bumbling and stumbling her way through a fight. Ok, that happens. But at the end Tanya has a gun on the guy who murdered her. She'll never see her kids again, she's about to die in her husbands arms. The guy who did this to her has no regrets. So Jen steps in front of the guy? This is the last chance Tanya will have for any sort of justice in her life and Jen says no? Why? So that her principles can be served and Cazon can go on smirking and the badoon can collect his bounty? That's great for her, Cazon and Kodor but what about Tanya and her husband and kids?

Mark_S

WTF!!!

You should just crawl in a hole now, and never come back out, at least as far as your Stark bashing goes.

Revenge is not justice. Jen stopping Tanya from killing Cazon allows Kodor to bring Cazon to justice for all of his victims, not just the one you feel sorry for.

I'm sorry, but it just seems a bit hypocritical to hate Tony the way you do for all the 'evil' things he's done, and then advocate cold-blooded revenge murder.

BTW, just for the record, so there's no confusion, I'm 100% pro death penalty, so if Cazon is executed after a trial, that's fine, but letting a victim kill him just wouldn't be right.

[Yaw]

Decent issue, though the book's got a very weird vibe...like there's an off-kilter balance between the title's seriousness and She-Hulk's humor. A lot of the panels and dialogue just seemed out of place or inappropriate.

Looking forward to Jen returning to true superheroing and Jazinda's role, if any, in Secret Invasion.



I agree that its vibe is a mix of humor and seriousness but I like it. As much as I like Slott, I couldn't get into the totally zany book he wrote or at least I couldn't get into every story. Some were hits and others were misses that were better consumed as trades if I deemed it worthy. This book however has the right mixture of humor and drama to keep me entertained.

[Mark_S]

WTF!!!

You should just crawl in a hole now, and never come back out, at least as far as your Stark bashing goes.

Revenge is not justice. Jen stopping Tanya from killing Cazon allows Kodor to bring Cazon to justice for all of his victims, not just the one you feel sorry for.

I'm sorry, but it just seems a bit hypocritical to hate Tony the way you do for all the 'evil' things he's done, and then advocate cold-blooded revenge murder.

BTW, just for the record, so there's no confusion, I'm 100% pro death penalty, so if Cazon is executed after a trial, that's fine, but letting a victim kill him just wouldn't be right.

Nope. In this case I'm saying that a woman who has been murdered and is about to die, can in fact feel herself dying, would not be commiting an evil act if she killed the person who has done this to her. Cazon was going off planet, what ever justice he was going to was undetermined. In effect Jen was taking the stand that the woman's last act should not be to kill-wich I can understand-but what alternative did Jen offer? In retrospect Jen was acting like a lawyer, again I can understand that. A lawyer will argue the sytem and concept of impersonal justice over the individuals right to personal justice, on the grounds that it can not be justice when emotion is involved. On an intellectual level I can see and appreciate that. But given that Tanya was on vacation, having a good time and had her life cut short, then revived for a short time and had to face the trauma of dying a second time while her killer stood there and smiled I think she should have been allowed some payback toward the guy who killed her. I don't think of killing the person who killed you as an evil act.

Mark_S

[Peter David]

Nope. In this case I'm saying that a woman who has been murdered and is about to die, can in fact feel herself dying, would not be commiting an evil act if she killed the person who has done this to her. Cazon was going off planet, what ever justice he was going to was undetermined. In effect Jen was taking the stand that the woman's last act should not be to kill-wich I can understand-but what alternative did Jen offer? In retrospect Jen was acting like a lawyer, again I can understand that. A lawyer will argue the sytem and concept of impersonal justice over the individuals right to personal justice, on the grounds that it can not be justice when emotion is involved. On an intellectual level I can see and appreciate that. But given that Tanya was on vacation, having a good time and had her life cut short, then revived for a short time and had to face the trauma of dying a second time while her killer stood there and smiled I think she should have been allowed some payback toward the guy who killed her. I don't think of killing the person who killed you as an evil act.

Mark_S

Personally, I agree with you. Were it me, I would not only have encouraged her to shoot the bastard, I would have held him steady so she could make it a good shot.

But that's not what She-Hulk would do.

Picture the scene as you're suggesting: The soon-to-be-dead begs She-Hulk to intercede, and she replies that he deserves what's coming and stands there and allows him to die.

Putting aside your understandable righteous indignation, ask yourself if that REALLY sounds like something Jennifer Walters would permit, under any circumstance? If you think it's not, then you understand where I was coming from in writing it the way I did. If you think it is, well, my instincts say you're wrong.

PAD

[unkiedev]

Hi PAD. I said I'd buy 26 and I did. I liked the part with the bear. If you put bear jokes in every issue then you and I won't have any problems...:)

I can imagine the next issue being about Jen telling the skrull lady to hit the dang road. To build to such a moral climax and then have that stinkin' skrull spoil it with her revenge violence.

What with Secret Invasion coming down the pike I think we'd all like to see less morally ambivalent Skrull's in Jens life.

[Mark_S]

Personally, I agree with you. Were it me, I would not only have encouraged her to shoot the bastard, I would have held him steady so she could make it a good shot.

But that's not what She-Hulk would do.

Picture the scene as you're suggesting: The soon-to-be-dead begs She-Hulk to intercede, and she replies that he deserves what's coming and stands there and allows him to die.

Putting aside your understandable righteous indignation, ask yourself if that REALLY sounds like something Jennifer Walters would permit, under any circumstance? If you think it's not, then you understand where I was coming from in writing it the way I did. If you think it is, well, my instincts say you're wrong.

PAD


No, I agree that it was perfectly in character for Jen to do that. I'm just not sure if she had the right to do it. I felt for Tanya in a way I wouldn't with just a normal npc because after she died she came back. In a way I felt for her more because she wasn't a heroine and therefore nearly guarented a way back from the afterlife. This death was real to me and it was harsh and the guy smirking really angered me. I felt that in her last moments of life Tanya deserved a shot at the guy. Still do, but you are right that Jen stopping her is what Jen would do. Also Curzon didn't say a thing so it was a spontaneous move on Jen's part. I'm just not sure if it was a heroic move. Had Tanya killed Curzon she would have died in vengeance and it's been mentioned before in the mu (early Ghost Rider) that a person who dies with anger or vengeance in thier heart can be claimed by Mephisto. So if Jen was seeking to save her from that it was heroic. Jen's had enough experience with death, she has a good idea of the rules I'm sure. But if Jen stepped in just because her principles dictated that the killing was wrong and that Tanya's right of justice/vengeance wasn't enough of a reason then I am not as sure it was heroic.

All that being said I can also say that having Jaz kill the guy does qualify as murder. I know that sounds contradictory but in Tanya's case she was dead, it was as if her ghost was going after the guy. Jaz was alive (how she is alive I don't know, could Jaz have been replaced by another skrull? Is she really a skrull?) and while it would have been understood if she belted him around a bit just killing him was too much. On the other hand Jaz might have felt responsible for Tanya, maybe guilty. And as an alien she had an idea of what was going to happen to Curzon. She might have felt that what was going to happen to him wasn't as bad as what he did to Tanya and decided on her own to ballance the scales of justice. I don't know enough about her to tell. But if Jen's sense of justice stopped Tanya from killing him it may be that Jaz's sense of justice drove her to kill him.

Now I wonder how Larry is going to explain this to his kids.

Mark_S

[Tobias Drake]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Just letting it be, however, only makes the innocent people blind.

Heroism: when you value your own moral superiority over the victims.

[Mark_S]

I also wonder if we'll see more of the Badoon bounty hunter. It was intriguing to see that though they were in the same business they had very little else in common. His view on the value of life was closer to his prey's than Jen's. Of course now he'll have to call the galactic equivalent of Tripple A to get his ship moving so he might be stuck on Earth for a while.

Mark_S

[unkiedev]

I also wonder if we'll see more of the Badoon bounty hunter. It was intriguing to see that though they were in the same business they had very little else in common. His view on the value of life was closer to his prey's than Jen's. Of course now he'll have to call the galactic equivalent of Tripple A to get his ship moving so he might be stuck on Earth for a while.

Mark_SI kinda hope we don't. He looks almost exactly like the Soul Caliber 3 character Necrid. I wonder if he was supposed to be of the same alien race as Ch'od.

[drwho]

You do all realize that after all these years this is the first appearance of the Badoon in the present 616 I believe. Maybe they appeared once in the original Silver Surfer series, but other than that they only appeared in future stories which is odd in my opinion and also one of the better ideas from this storyline. Chod is not a badoon.

[Mark_S]

I didn't realize that, I remember them from the Defenders/Guardians of the Galaxy series but I hadn't realized that they'd never shown up in this era of the mu. I thought Kodor was interesting in that he was totally oblivious to the feelings of humans, but knew enough to recognize Jen as a former Magistrati. So he's had some doings on a galactic scale but is still not really interested in justice, only the bounty. Now his bounty's gone, what kind of hit does that put in his budget? It would be interesting to see if his path to becoming a bounty hunter was anything like Jen's.

Mark_S

[Teitr Styrr]

My thoughts are that Jen had a choice to make, and she made it. I personally would have been okay with whatever choice she made, as I am okay with the choice Jazinda made.

I also think, in this siuation, Tanya getting revenge would have been justice, at least for her. And hell, maybe all the beings that guy did do harm. It was implied he had harmed plenty. It was also implied he would have a trial (I think), and as royalty he might have beat the charges. The Badoon didn't seem too upset that he was killed.

But I also agree that Jen did what was in character for her. However, with her questioning what a hero is, and whether she wanted to be one or not, I could see how letting Tanya kill the guy would have been "temporarily" in character for her.

[gideon]

Anyone else interested in having the Badoon bounty hunter join up with Jen and Jazinda? Seriously, I love that guy. He's funny, capable and really seems to get logic, something Jen lacks.

Loved this quote: "For someone claiming to have no interest in heroics, you're annoyingly interested in everyone else's welfare!" hehe

[DeadXMan]

Hey pad, how come Jen's jeans are made of unstable molecules like her top is?

Loved the issue especially the raccoon joke in the background

[Peter David]

Now I wonder how Larry is going to explain this to his kids.

Mark_S

Ahhh, very good question.

Consider the situation: Man whose marriage is on the rocks goes into the forest with his wife, and returns without said wife, claiming she was killed by aliens and her body is gone.

What do YOU think is going to be the reaction he's going to get, not just from his kids, but from the authorities?



PAD

[Mark_S]

Ahhh, very good question.

Consider the situation: Man whose marriage is on the rocks goes into the forest with his wife, and returns without said wife, claiming she was killed by aliens and her body is gone.

What do YOU think is going to be the reaction he's going to get, not just from his kids, but from the authorities?



PAD

It'll get harder on him if Jen doesn't step up and back him up, but how does she do that and not lie about what Jaz did? She's not a lawyer anymore but a bounty hunter is still an officer of the court, she can't legally lie and keep her liscence.

Oh, on her bottom being missing, I figure it didn't burn up as much as the thrust from the rocket simply tore it off of her.

I'm now going to try to avoid all of the jokes that come to mind that have no place on a family board.

Mark_S

[Somebody]

One other point - regardless of real life, in the MU there's heavens and hells. And She-Hulk knows this to be an absolute, provable, fact. Wouldn't letting her kill the guy tip the karmic balance, as it were, for what way evapourwoman is going to go?

[dkostus]

Ahhh, very good question.

Consider the situation: Man whose marriage is on the rocks goes into the forest with his wife, and returns without said wife, claiming she was killed by aliens and her body is gone.

What do YOU think is going to be the reaction he's going to get, not just from his kids, but from the authorities?



PAD

I assume he's the person then that Jen is going to have to defend, which is hinted at in future solcits?

Mr. David, I have to tell you I registered just now for the sole purpose of responding to this thread. I started picking up She-Hulk when you started writing the book just because of how much I enjoy your writing on X-Factor. I have always liked the character though, and agree that her actions at the end of 26 were in line with her moral code (I'm a lawyer too, and she seems pretty dedicated to the rule of law.)

Now, given that I'm really in it for the writing, its almost embarrassing that my one complaint is aesthetic: Jen on the cover in leather pants and white t-shirt? Hot. Jen inked a little too dark (are her skin and hair REALLY the exact same color) and constantly wearing purple spandex? eh, not so much.

Any chance of some leather pants made out of unstable molecules? I know you're not the artist or inker, but just wanted to comment...

Thanks!

[Mark_S]

I'd sort of like to see Jen dressed up as Red Sonja or Xena.

If Jen does have to defend Larry there is another way out, just have Jaz pretend to be Tanya. I don't think it will happen but I think it would be in Jaz's character to suggest it.

Mark_S

[Tobias Drake]

One other point - regardless of real life, in the MU there's heavens and hells. And She-Hulk knows this to be an absolute, provable, fact. Wouldn't letting her kill the guy tip the karmic balance, as it were, for what way evapourwoman is going to go?

Not if it's justified.

[Mark_S]

Not if it's justified.

We also don't know what sort of afterlife he is heading too. He is alien after all. Maybe all that Jaz did was send him into paradise.

Mark_S

[Tobias Drake]

We also don't know what sort of afterlife he is heading too. He is alien after all. Maybe all that Jaz did was send him into paradise.

Mark_S

Which would be a complaint to be taken up with his deity and/or deities. We can't decide for ourselves where in the afterlife a person goes; we can simply send them there. Maybe suicide bombers actually do get their 84 virgins. We can only believe that's not the case, and do our job.

[Mark_S]

That is the thing of course, man's justice ends at death's door.

Mark_S

[DeadXMan]

Ahhh, very good question.

Consider the situation: Man whose marriage is on the rocks goes into the forest with his wife, and returns without said wife, claiming she was killed by aliens and her body is gone.

What do YOU think is going to be the reaction he's going to get, not just from his kids, but from the authorities?



PAD



sounds like someone gonna need an attorney;)

[Dr. Chaos]

Ahhh, very good question.

Consider the situation: Man whose marriage is on the rocks goes into the forest with his wife, and returns without said wife, claiming she was killed by aliens and her body is gone.

What do YOU think is going to be the reaction he's going to get, not just from his kids, but from the authorities?
Not to dispute the fact that he doesn't have alot of evidence to avoid suspicion but aren't police in the Marvel Universe a lil more open minded though, as far as the alien part goes?

After something like Galactus, seems like lil green men murdering your wife in the woods isn't too much of a stretch.

[Peter David]

sounds like someone gonna need an attorney;)

Sure does. Except Jen's not an attorney anymore.

Soooo what do you think she does?

Come on: Work it out.

PAD

[sHayden]

I have a huge problem with the revenge is not justice thing.
What is justice? Taking someone in front of a judge so they can sentence that person to prison? Often justice is simply watered down revenge.

[Shyft]

And violence begets violence...

not if the person you're begetting violence on is dead.

[Mark_S]

I have a huge problem with the revenge is not justice thing.
What is justice? Taking someone in front of a judge so they can sentence that person to prison? Often justice is simply watered down revenge.

Not quite. At least it's not really what the principles of our culture are based on. Without a legal system retaliation for any wrong could take any form, no limits. You can see this down through history when clan wars were started over very small things and escalated. The principle of third party justice is that a crime is a dispute between two parties, neither of whom can be trusted to look objectionally at the crime. The victim feels only pain and the need to lash out, the criminal discounts the victims pain entirely. Without a third party to judge resolving the dispute becomes a matter of who is stronger. No civiliazation can last long on that principle. The theory is that a third party entrusted by all can look at the matter objectively and dispence true justice, punishing the criminal without malice.
At least that is the ideal. The reality often falls far short of that and Jen must be aware of this more than anyone else. But there is still that part of her that won't let go of the ideal, which is great if you happen to be someone like Cazon who always knows that he can count on Jen for protection, not so great if you are Tanya who knows that the man who killed her will most likely go un-punished. That's another part of civilization though, to be a part of it you have to give up some rights and one of those is the right to vengeance. In this case though the line blurred because Tanya was dying. She wasn't seriously hurt, she was dead and dying a second time. Given that I'm really not sure Jen did the right thing in the cause of justice, even if she might have been legally and morally right.

Mark_S

[Tobias Drake]

I honestly think a court would have exhonerated Tanya for her actions. She would be guilty of murder, but I do think any jury would agree she was justified for it. Which, of course, is a moot point because she would still be too dead to ever go to a trial, but still, I don't think any jury in the world would convict her for killing Cazon.

[Merrik]

Sure does. Except Jen's not an attorney anymore.

Soooo what do you think she does?

Come on: Work it out.

PAD


Matt Murdock!!!

Yeah??

No?


No...

:p

[Mark_S]

Mallory.

Mark_S

[DeadXMan]

Sure does. Except Jen's not an attorney anymore.

SO what do you think she does?

Come on: Work it out.

PAD


Shulky starts a bikini car wash with Janet & Sue to raise money to hire the best Law firm in the MU, where hijacks and a malfunctioning Vacuum leads to steamy results?

[Peter David]

Shulhy starts a bikini car wash with Janet & Sue to raise money to hire the best Law firm in the MU, where hijacks and a malfunctioning Vacuum leads to steamy results?

Yyyyyyyeah...

What's frightening is that that would sell through the roof and there would be fans saying, "At last! The sort of She-Hulk stories PAD should be writing. Enough of this deep characterization crap."

PAD

[DeadXMan]

Yyyyyyyeah...

What's frightening is that that would sell through the roof and there would be fans saying, "At last! The sort of She-Hulk stories PAD should be writing. Enough of this deep characterization crap."

PAD


stick with me kid, and you'll go places. ;)

keep up the good work PAD
Can't wait for the the next issue, and the next X-Factor.

[Mark_S]

Yyyyyyyeah...

What's frightening is that that would sell through the roof and there would be fans saying, "At last! The sort of She-Hulk stories PAD should be writing. Enough of this deep characterization crap."

PAD

Reminds me of a story in the old She-Hulk book, issue 50 I think where all the writers and artist had a shot at writing the story from Wendi Pinni on. There was on where Jen and the Wasp had to fight almost nude on a beach. I loved that issue, especially the lil' She-Hulk at the end.

Mark_S

[gorthon616]

I honestly think a court would have exhonerated Tanya for her actions. She would be guilty of murder, but I do think any jury would agree she was justified for it. Which, of course, is a moot point because she would still be too dead to ever go to a trial, but still, I don't think any jury in the world would convict her for killing Cazon.

Based on what legal theory would she be innocent under? 'Cause... umm... no.... no she wouldn't. Well, unless if we are talking about the fictional legal universe.... But not in a real one, no.

[Loner]

You do all realize that after all these years this is the first appearance of the Badoon in the present 616 I believe. Maybe they appeared once in the original Silver Surfer series, but other than that they only appeared in future stories which is odd in my opinion and also one of the better ideas from this storyline. Chod is not a badoon.

No, they appeared in an X-Men Annual when they abducted the FF to Arkon's homeworld in the early 80s.

[drwho]

Shulky starts a bikini car wash with Janet & Sue to raise money to hire the best Law firm in the MU, where hijacks and a malfunctioning Vacuum leads to steamy results?

Sounds like you are trying to steal millars story over in ff. ;)

[DeadXMan]

Sounds like you are trying to steal millars story over in ff. ;)

just keeping with continuity ;)
(and if drawn by cho, we would sell millions)

[mikekerr3]

Based on what legal theory would she be innocent under? 'Cause... umm... no.... no she wouldn't. Well, unless if we are talking about the fictional legal universe.... But not in a real one, no.

Being dead would probably qualifie as mental infirmity:D

[Archmage]

Based on what legal theory would she be innocent under? 'Cause... umm... no.... no she wouldn't. Well, unless if we are talking about the fictional legal universe.... But not in a real one, no.

she would not be held accountable because any half-competent lawyer would argue that she was not in her right mind and mentally incompentent to be held liable. I think most would agree with that assessment. And to be honest, in this set of circumstances, it would never get to court. She would already be dead before any charges can be brought against her.

[CMBMOOL]

I still question is the Skrull partner still alive, because she looked dead last issue ? :(

[Merrik]

I still question is the Skrull partner still alive, because she looked dead last issue ? :(


I'd say it's safe to assume that yeah, she's still alive. She even mentioned she was in a regenerative coma and that's why she looked a bit under the weather.

Plus, if the first issue under PAD is any indication, Jazinda can have her neck snapped like a twig and still come out swinging, so I doubt the blast from that puny little ray gun woulda really done TOO much damage!

[3D Master]

One other point - regardless of real life, in the MU there's heavens and hells. And She-Hulk knows this to be an absolute, provable, fact. Wouldn't letting her kill the guy tip the karmic balance, as it were, for what way evapourwoman is going to go?

A god that sends people to hell because they killed their killer in their dying moments is a god that needs to be destroyed, and someone more benevolent should be put in charge of those hells and heavens.

Actually, all those heavens and hells should just be destroyed along with the gods in charge and be done with, but eh.

[Crimson]

A god that sends people to hell because they killed their killer in their dying moments, is a god that needs to be destroyed, and someone more benevolent should be put in charge of those hells and heavens.

Actually, all those heavens and hells should just be destroyed along with the gods in charge and be done with, but eh.

Trying not to get into a religious debate (cause lets face it, those arguements have been going on for thousands of years... we ain't going to fix it in a comic book forum heh) but killing is meant to be the ultimate sin. I don't think there are loop holes just because they did it first.

[Tobias Drake]

Trying not to get into a religious debate (cause lets face it, those arguements have been going on for thousands of years... we ain't going to fix it in a comic book forum heh) but killing is meant to be the ultimate sin. I don't think there are loop holes just because they did it first.

In its defense, the ultimate sin is punished in religion by killing the person who committed it. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[3D Master]

Trying not to get into a religious debate (cause lets face it, those arguements have been going on for thousands of years... we ain't going to fix it in a comic book forum heh) but killing is meant to be the ultimate sin. I don't think there are loop holes just because they did it first.

Killing is meant to be the ultimate sin? Not by my book. Now murder is up there (but not quite the top rank either), but not killing.

[Crimson]

In its defense, the ultimate sin is punished in religion by killing the person who committed it. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Good point. ;)


Killing is meant to be the ultimate sin? Not by my book. Now murder is up there (but not quite the top rank either), but not killing.

But wouldn't it be murder in this case? I mean can you justify revenge as a motive for murder?

[gorthon616]

she would not be held accountable because any half-competent lawyer would argue that she was not in her right mind and mentally incompentent to be held liable. I think most would agree with that assessment. And to be honest, in this set of circumstances, it would never get to court. She would already be dead before any charges can be brought against her.

Lawyers argue everything. Doesn't mean that it's a legit argument. And she would not be mentally incompetent. "Right mind" is not the standard... or else no one would ever be guilty of murder.

And post-death you can still go after her estate in civil proceedings for damages.

[3D Master]

Good point. ;)

But wouldn't it be murder in this case? I mean can you justify revenge as a motive for murder?

When the person is dying and the killer stands right in front of you, it's not murder. It's a fight that isn't over yet, that the killer started. It's self-defense, regardless of the nitty gritty. This isn't killing someone that killed someone else that you liked, this is the guy that killed YOU.

[gorthon616]

When the person is dying and the killer stands right in front of you, it's not murder. It's a fight that isn't over yet, that the killer started. It's self-defense, regardless of the nitty gritty. This isn't killing someone that killed someone else that you liked, this is the guy that killed YOU.

So if someone stabs me in an attempt to kill me, and a month later I track him down and shoot him in the head that's not murder?

That's not self-defense regardless of your mental gymnastics.

[3D Master]

So if someone stabs me in an attempt to kill me, and a month later I track him down and shoot him in the head that's not murder?

That's not self-defense regardless of your mental gymnastics.

That's nice for you, except you forget that point of the person DYING with the killer in front of her. That's not being 100% alive, a long time after the attempted kill has occurred.

[Mark_S]

That's nice for you, except you forget that point of the person DYING with the killer in front of her. That's not being 100% alive, a long time after the attempted kill has occurred.

Yes, and this what makes the question so tricky. Tanya was dying again and her killer was standing in front of her smiling about it. Now that really can't happen outside of the comic so it opens up a hypothetical ethical problem that occured to me when I read the scene. Also there was some rightous indignation as PAD pointed out. At the time she was dying Tanya had the chance to take out her killer, but at that point her killer was no danger to her. He'd already killed her. While it was in character and true to her ethics for Jen to step in and save the guy I wondered if it were truly the right thing for her to do. What ever happens after this Jen goes on with her life, Tanya's life stopped. I'm not sure but I get the feeling that in that case Tanya's last wish should have counted for more than Jen's ethics.

In real life killing someone for killing someone else is a debateable form of justice. The legal system was designed to make sure that it would be justice, not vengeance. Any sort of devine justice would (in theory) be taken care of after death. In this world we can't really know what happens, Jen in her world has a good idea. So maybe she was saving Tanya, but it's hard to tell.

Mark_S

[gorthon616]

That's nice for you, except you forget that point of the person DYING with the killer in front of her. That's not being 100% alive, a long time after the attempted kill has occurred.

Right. And the fact that she came back to life suddenly makes it self-defense? You can self-defend against an assault too ya know. So if you want to create a strict parallel situation here it goes. You get assaulted. A month later you assault them. You claim your assault is self-defense. You are wrong.

Again, no matter what mental gymnastic you perform, it's not self-defense not matter how much you want to make it self-defense.

[3D Master]

Right. And the fact that she came back to life suddenly makes it self-defense? You can self-defend against an assault too ya know. So if you want to create a strict parallel situation here it goes. You get assaulted. A month later you assault them. You claim your assault is self-defense. You are wrong.

Wrong. Coming back to life, only to die again because of the same action. The correct parallel would be; you get assaulted, and a month later you're still being assaulted and then you fight back.


Again, no matter what mental gymnastic you perform, it's not self-defense not matter how much you want to make it self-defense.

I don't care that you think it's not self-defense, it is in my book.

[gorthon616]

No, that would be a citizen's arrest that went wrong, not an assault.

When did you say that she was trying to arrest him? When did you say that she was forced to use lethal force accidentally? Or that the shooting was an accident?


I don't care that you think it's not self-defense, it is in my book.

It's not what I think buddy, I graduate form law school at the end of the spring.

But yeah, think whatever you want to think in your book man.

[3D Master]

Right. And the fact that she came back to life suddenly makes it self-defense? You can self-defend against an assault too ya know. So if you want to create a strict parallel situation here it goes. You get assaulted. A month later you assault them. You claim your assault is self-defense. You are wrong.

Again, no matter what mental gymnastic you perform, it's not self-defense not matter how much you want to make it self-defense.

When did you say that she was trying to arrest him? When did you say that she was forced to use lethal force accidentally? Or that the shooting was an accident?

It's about the equal return force. He killed her, she kills him. He assaults her, and a month later you attack a criminal, you're not assaulting him, you're taking him in. That you beat the crap out of him to do so, doesn't matter.

Also, in this scenario to get the proper parallel, you would still be being assaulted that month later.

[Drdmx]

Your book seems to inspire alot of passionate conversation. Good job PAD, keep it up.

[Mark_S]

When did you say that she was trying to arrest him? When did you say that she was forced to use lethal force accidentally? Or that the shooting was an accident?



It's not what I think buddy, I graduate form law school at the end of the spring.

But yeah, think whatever you want to think in your book man.

So I can ask two questions then: First how would you prosecute Tanya if she had managed to kill him? Isn't murder defined as the killing of a human being? And if Cazon had not died how could you prosecute someone who wasn't a US citizen and not even human? Would he be classified as an illegal alien?

Mark_S

[Archmage]

When did you say that she was trying to arrest him? When did you say that she was forced to use lethal force accidentally? Or that the shooting was an accident?


It's not what I think buddy, I graduate form law school at the end of the spring.

But yeah, think whatever you want to think in your book man.


And after 4 years in law school, you're going to tell me that you actually believe that a half-decent defense lawyer wouldn't be able to actually acquit her? When there are thousands of cases where defense lawyers have successfully argued that their clients suffered a psychotic break from reality and as a result, are not responsible for their actions? Insert theoretical case where son/daughter/mother/husband is killed and the defendant suffers from a psychotic break and is therefore treated as mentally incompetent as long as there was no evidence that the defendant carefully and meticulously planned to kill the person responsible?


Uh.. right...

[gorthon616]

So I can ask two questions then: First how would you prosecute Tanya if she had managed to kill him? Isn't murder defined as the killing of a human being? And if Cazon had not died how could you prosecute someone who wasn't a US citizen and not even human? Would he be classified as an illegal alien?

Mark_S

Serious question?

Assuming "Marvel-Reality," I would figure (though I'm not sure) things of that nature have essentially been overlooked, and they have been treated as being a human being. It's actually a fair interesting topic, my friend did a research paper on the hypothetical legal rights of metahumans... mine actually related to bio-engineering human beings. But as far as non-humans, being treated as humans, you do have to realize in the REAL world people are pushing for animals to have legal standing to suit, so it's really not a stretch to say in the Marvel Universe they've expanded the term human being.

Secondly, you can prosecute illegals. It would play out differently for a variety of technical and political reasons, but you can.

[gorthon616]

And after 4 years in law school, you're going to tell me that you actually believe that a half-decent defense lawyer wouldn't be able to actually acquit her? When there are thousands of cases where defense lawyers have successfully argued that their clients suffered a psychotic break from reality and as a result, are not responsible for their actions? Insert theoretical case where son/daughter/mother/husband is killed and the defendant suffers from a psychotic break and is therefore treated as mentally incompetent as long as there was no evidence that the defendant carefully and meticulously planned to kill the person responsible?


Uh.. right...

Law school is 3 years buddy.

[Archmage]

Law school is 3 years buddy.


ahem... 3 years full time/ 4 years part time BUDDY.
The point is that no jury in this country will convict based on the facts in this case. I for one, will not convict her.

[gorthon616]

ahem... 3 years full time/ 4 years part time BUDDY.

I'm full time. What about you?


The point is that no jury in this country will convict based on the facts in this case. I for one, will not convict her.

Didn't see (or you maybe you edited it after I replied dunno) that last line. Technically, if you were a juror you wouldn't have read the comic, since jurors are tested to not have created opinions on the case before the trial starts, so the point is irrelevant.

[radioshow host]

maybe she is a fake Skrull? :)

[Archmage]

I'm full time. What about you?



are you serious? You're actually going to try to compare credentials?

LOL

[Mark_S]

Serious question?

Assuming "Marvel-Reality," I would figure (though I'm not sure) things of that nature have essentially been overlooked, and they have been treated as being a human being. It's actually a fair interesting topic, my friend did a research paper on the hypothetical legal rights of metahumans... mine actually related to bio-engineering human beings. But as far as non-humans, being treated as humans, you do have to realize in the REAL world people are pushing for animals to have legal standing to suit, so it's really not a stretch to say in the Marvel Universe they've expanded the term human being.

Secondly, you can prosecute illegals. It would play out differently for a variety of technical and political reasons, but you can.


Yep, seriously. I figured that metahumans are one thing, but aliens are another. If Tanya had somehow lived it would have been only one aspect of a possible defense for her.
Of course if Cazon had lived and the bounty hunter had agreed to let Earth authorities handle the case things might have been even harder. The evidence of his crime is gone, her body dispersed to the winds. Jazinda isn't even dead anymore. Your witnesses would be an alien shape shifter, an alien bounty hunter, a dissbarred lawyer and the husband who was having troubles with his wife to begin with. Earth law doesn't seem to do very well with aliens.

Mark_S

[Drdmx]

Stop being snide to one another in the thread. Mike is gonna lock the thread over your "tiff". If you wanna go back and forth, PM each other and then let us know who won.

[The Shadow]

Stop being snide to one another in the thread. Mike is gonna lock the thread over your "tiff". If you wanna go back and forth, PM each other and then let us know who won.

I say we put them in... THUNDERDOME!

Two go in... one comes out.

http://www.blissism.com/weblogpix/usa02/bm02/image/6_thunderdome.jpg

[unkiedev]

The Motion to place the Lawyers in the Thunderdome is Seconded, and as seconded we move for a vote:

All those in Favor say "Aye."

AYE!

[tedward1984]

Sure does. Except Jen's not an attorney anymore.

Soooo what do you think she does?

Come on: Work it out.

PAD

Show them an alien corpse? But then, I suppose someone would have to take the rap for it...

Really enjoying the book.

[Peter David]

Your book seems to inspire alot of passionate conversation. Good job PAD, keep it up.

So I've noticed. This discussion is lightyears beyond the concerns of the types of fans who mainly seem obsessed with She-Hulk's breasts or sniping at the book because they've developed some personal hostility toward me. Kudos all around.

PAD

[Peter David]

Show them an alien corpse? But then, I suppose someone would have to take the rap for it...

Really enjoying the book.

Corpse is gone. Badoon took it with him to at least prove that he found the guy he was looking for.

PAD

[Tobias Drake]

Corpse is gone. Badoon took it with him to at least prove that he found the guy he was looking for.

PAD

Which means Badoon is also gone, and he was a key witness.

[Mark_S]

So I've noticed. This discussion is lightyears beyond the concerns of the types of fans who mainly seem obsessed with She-Hulk's breasts or sniping at the book because they've developed some personal hostility toward me. Kudos all around.

PAD

Thanks, but don't think that we've really stopped being concerned about her breasts :D

Or Jazinda's for that matter.

But enough Sunday morning humor. Still if Badoon is gone then that is really going to complicated the legal matters. As long as the shra is in effect shouldn't there be some sort of temp ID for alien bounty hunters? This isn't the first time we've seen an alien cause some damage and then leave. The time that most sticks in my mind was when Gladiator was after some skrulls and leveled a good deal of New York and hurt a lot of heroes and then just left. By this time with all the knowlege of alien races shouldn't there be a marvel version of the MIB to keep track of them and keep this from happening?

Mark_S