Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
StillKirok

General Marvel Discussion

2,163 posts in this topic

Yep, I think option #1 would be probable and it certainly would be a great show to watch but that would have been a very different tv show. I also don't know if the general culture at that time would have accepted such a show where the government is potentially the evil empire. A movie once in a while is one thing. A weekly daily show....not sure.

However, I think that would fly easily today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, to be convicted of murder, there has to be some sort of intent to kill. It would be fairly easy for a lawyer to establish that David doesn't have control over his mental facilities as the Hulk.

Any competent lawyer would be able to get David off for murder. And that doesn't even factor in proving whether in fact the Hulk DID cause the death of Elena Marks, which as the audience, we know is not the case.

I do think option #2 would be more likely. Banner is clearly a genius, and likely would be able to come up with some excuse about faking his death. If anything, he could simply say after Marks' death, he chose to disappear from the public eye, but at no point did he intend to fake his death. His father and sister certainly knew he was alive, and they'd be able to testify to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, to be convicted of murder, there has to be some sort of intent to kill. It would be fairly easy for a lawyer to establish that David doesn't have control over his mental facilities as the Hulk.

Any competent lawyer would be able to get David off for murder. And that doesn't even factor in proving whether in fact the Hulk DID cause the death of Elena Marks, which as the audience, we know is not the case.

I do think option #2 would be more likely. Banner is clearly a genius, and likely would be able to come up with some excuse about faking his death. If anything, he could simply say after Marks' death, he chose to disappear from the public eye, but at no point did he intend to fake his death. His father and sister certainly knew he was alive, and they'd be able to testify to that.

Yes, but once the Hulk's abilities became public?

You can bet sure as hell he'd be shipped off to a military/government quarantine for testing with the intent on weaponizing his abilities (again: I refer you to the 2008 movie).

I do agree that he'd most likely get off on an insanity plea of some sort, but most likely he'd never make it to trial; let alone be acquitted. He'd probably never get the chance.

The military-industrial complex would see him as a new toy in their arsenal and take him away long before that'd happen. But even if he got a fair trial, he'd never be fully acquitted; because even if he were not found responsible for Elena Marks' death, he'd still be considered extremely dangerous (even if not responsible).

Option #2 is possible, but if the evidence that Banner is the Hulk were conclusive? Option #1 would be most likely IMO.

Put it another way; if the Incredible Hulk TV series took place now (in the information age) where phone cameras and street views are everywhere?

Option #1 would definitely happen; the creature would've never made it as far as he did in the TV series, nor could Banner have lived off-the-grid for as long as he did (ah, the innocence of the '70s/'80s... :P ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, to be convicted of murder, there has to be some sort of intent to kill.

This depends on the state and if that state requires proof of intent as an element of the crime. For the top charge (First degree murder) yes. But some states have lesser homicide charges such as second degree intentional homicide (going overboard on the use of force in self-defense) or a charge of reckless homicide.

Any lawyer worth his salt would go for (and get) a Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Disease or Defect.

Even so, that still gets David a deep, dark, state run cell until he dies.

Edited by prometheus59650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, to be convicted of murder, there has to be some sort of intent to kill.

This depends on the state and if that state requires proof of intent as an element of the crime. For the top charge (First degree murder) yes. But some states have lesser homicide charges such as second degree intentional homicide (going overboard on the use of force in self-defense) or a charge of reckless homicide.

Any lawyer worth his salt would go for (and get) a Not Guilty by Reason of Mental Disease or Defect.

Even so, that still gets David a deep, dark, state run cell until he dies.

Of course, it'd have to be one hell of a THICK cell to keep the Hulk locked up... :giggle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's murder. Unless it's a strict liability situation, like statutory rape, pretty much every criminal case requires a certain mental state to be convicted.

There is virtually no chance David would be convicted of murder.

Intent to kill is a very important element.

And beyond a reasonable doubt? No chance.

He probably wouldn't even be charged with murder.

I would actually think David would get off scot free criminally. Now the question of what happens to him would be an issue.

I think the Hulk's existence would make it clear that if the soldier can't control himself, the creature is useless as a weapon. Especially this version of the Hulk, who could be killed by a gun.

David's version of the Hulk really was super strong, and had a big time ability to heal fast. But other than that, he wasn't quite vulnerable.

An enemy would be able to stop him fairly easily if armed properly.

The Hulk would only be useful if he was able to maintain his full intelligence. Ultimately, that's why Captain America worked as a weapon.

It would be more in the advantage of the public for David to be dead, though one would hope that they would study what happened for the sake of undoing it.

The reality is, there IS a cure for David's condition and he knows it.

If it wasn't for the second Hulk, he would have cured himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it's a strict liability situation, like statutory rape, pretty much every criminal case requires a certain mental state to be convicted.

As I just explained, no it doesn't, at least there's no functional difference in the outcome.

Get off on a murder charge via "mental disease," you're still in a state hospital. And, statistically, your stretch in the state hospital is longer than your prison sentence would have been been anyway. And that's not even counting sex offenders who can serve every day of their sentence and still find themselves locked up for life.

Intent to kill is a very important element.

Again, as I just explained two posts ago, not necessarily.

I would actually think David would get off scot free criminally.

He would actually not. In every jurisdiction in the country he would at least be convicted of a slew of lesser-included reckless injury charges. (for which intent is not an element) Stack enough of them consecutively (which would be fairly easy to do given the nature of his rampages) and you get a life sentence all the same.

So one can play semantics with what might be listed on the indictment all one wants, but there's no difference in the result.

I think the Hulk's existence would make it clear that if the soldier can't control himself, the creature is useless as a weapon. ...The Hulk would only be useful if he was able to maintain his full intelligence.

Morale-shattering psychological warfare anyone? How do you think HD video of 1,000 Hulks ripping through a US military base would play on CNN?

Edited by prometheus59650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I just explained, no it doesn't, at least there's no functional difference in the outcome.

Get off on a murder charge via "mental disease," you're still in a state hospital. And, statistically, your stretch in the state hospital is longer than your prison sentence would have been been anyway. And that's not even counting sex offenders who can serve every day of their sentence and still find themselves locked up for life.

You can explain it all you want, but it's still wrong. Murder requires intent to kill. Without that, there is no conviction for murder. There could be lesser homicide charges without an intent to kill, but not murder.

Malice aforethought is a requirement for murder. That would never be able to be proven in David's case.

Additionally, David might have the defense of involuntary intoxication, where he had no clue that the gamma rays would induce such a transformation where he would be out of his mind.

Would David be allowed to roam free completely? Doubtful, but he would likely be put in a situation where he would be able to work on his cure. And what more could he want?

But the bottom line is that there is zero chance that David would be convicted in murder in any jurisdiction in the country. There is very little chance he would be convicted of a lesser homicide, because it would require proof that doesn't exist.

As for 1000 hulks ripping through a US military base, that thought pretty much sums up why they would never risk it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Murder requires intent to kill.

Not in every state at at every level of definition. You can stick to your rigid definitions all you want, but that changes nothing either. That's pretty much between the populace and the legislature.

Additionally, David might have the defense of involuntary intoxication, where he had no clue that the gamma rays would induce such a transformation where he would be out of his mind.

No lawyer worth his JD would attempt that defense. Lionel Hutz maybe.

Doubtful, but he would likely be put in a situation where he would be able to work on his cure. And what more could he want?

No way in Hades. A locked up David Banner (assuming he wasn't whisked away to a secure government facility) would have no access to anything but perhaps pen and paper. It's more likely he'd be living his life in solitary, and most likely of all that he be strapped to a gurney doped out on Thorazine.

Edited by prometheus59650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone else going to watch Agent Carter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone else going to watch Agent Carter?

For sure. Looking forward to it actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Murder requires intent to kill.

Not in every state at at every level of definition. You can stick to your rigid definitions all you want, but that changes nothing either. That's pretty much between the populace and the legislature.

Additionally, David might have the defense of involuntary intoxication, where he had no clue that the gamma rays would induce such a transformation where he would be out of his mind.

No lawyer worth his JD would attempt that defense. Lionel Hutz maybe.

Doubtful, but he would likely be put in a situation where he would be able to work on his cure. And what more could he want?

No way in Hades. A locked up David Banner (assuming he wasn't whisked away to a secure government facility) would have no access to anything but perhaps pen and paper. It's more likely he'd be living his life in solitary, and most likely of all that he be strapped to a gurney doped out on Thorazine.

I totally agree that even if the Hulk were charged only with, say, manslaughter (which has no intent, but is still a homicide charge of a sort)? Once it is determined that he can metamorphosize into a giant, green, dangerous monster there would be NO WAY in hell or a court (same difference to some) that he would ever see freedom again (assuming he weren't taken to an Area 51-type facility for weaponizing of his 'special gift'). He would be, as you say, strapped to a gurney on a steady diet of thorazine and his own drool....

You can explain it all you want, but it's still wrong.

I think he explained it quite rationally. And 'wrong' is subjective.

Murder requires intent to kill. Without that, there is no conviction for murder.

No, not necessarily.

There is manslaughter, culpable negligence, or in the OJ Simpson civil case, liability for wrongful death. None of those requires intent; only a causing of another's death (voluntarily or not). Drunk drivers don't 'mean' it when they plow into another vehicle; but under the law they are still liable for any deaths/injuries sustained. Banner/Hulk (again; same person) could easily be seen as someone who voluntarily and recklessly submitted on an overdose of dangerous radiation (with no control present) and brought about his transformation via his own will (this is, sadly, where animal test subjects often come in handy...).

I think legally that, since he 'made' himself a Hulk, he is also (perhaps unfairly) responsible for the creature's actions. David Banner knows this; hence his continual guilt over the creature's actions while he is blacked out. He even risked permanent paralysis at one point rather than risk another transformation ("They Harder They Fall").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone else going to watch Agent Carter?

For sure. Looking forward to it actually.

Undecided.

Hayley Atwell is gorgeous (lovely eye candy), but I'm so burned on TV sequels/prequels of comic books that I'd just as soon wait for it on Netflix only if the buzz is any good.

Agents of SHIELD and Gotham both failed to impress and lure me into a weekly series, and I'm not sure this show will be any different.

On the other hand...

tumblr_mmujy3Swai1s4kxaao6_1280.jpghayley-atwell-photo-115.jpg

Mmmmm.... Tuesday night, right? :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL.

First two episodes on Tuesday You'll like it or not. Give it a go :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not in every state at at every level of definition. You can stick to your rigid definitions all you want, but that changes nothing either. That's pretty much between the populace and the legislature.

That's simply not true. It's not MY definitions. It's THE definition. I challenge you to find one state that would allow a murder conviction without malice aforethought. It's essential.

No lawyer worth his JD would attempt that defense. Lionel Hutz maybe.

This isn't true either. Involuntary intoxication actually is a defense for murder. It's also similar to an epileptic seizure. If someone has that seizure, and accidentally kills someone during it, he would not be charged with murder. No lawyer worth his JD would CHARGE David with murder. The only crimes that David could be convicted of would be faking his own death and failure to pay taxes while faking his death.

No way in Hades. A locked up David Banner (assuming he wasn't whisked away to a secure government facility) would have no access to anything but perhaps pen and paper. It's more likely he'd be living his life in solitary, and most likely of all that he be strapped to a gurney doped out on Thorazine.

At least this one is something that reasonable minds can differ.

I totally agree that even if the Hulk were charged only with, say, manslaughter (which has no intent, but is still a homicide charge of a sort)? Once it is determined that he can metamorphosize into a giant, green, dangerous monster there would be NO WAY in hell or a court (same difference to some) that he would ever see freedom again (assuming he weren't taken to an Area 51-type facility for weaponizing of his 'special gift'). He would be, as you say, strapped to a gurney on a steady diet of thorazine and his own drool....

MAYBE he could get charged with some sort of involuntary manslaughter, but it's really doubtful he would get convicted because ultimately, the homicide, even if the Hulk actually did it, would not be his fault. But you would likely have to prove that David knew that getting angry would put lives in danger and did it anyway.

I think he explained it quite rationally. And 'wrong' is subjective.

With a question of opinion, wrong is subjective. In a question of fact, it is not. The Earth is round. If I were to say it was flat, I would be wrong. Murder requires malice aforethought. There is no jurisdiction in the country that doesn't require it. It's not subjective. To argue otherwise, is simply wrong.

There is manslaughter, culpable negligence, or in the OJ Simpson civil case, liability for wrongful death.

None of these are murder. One of them (wrongful death), isn't criminal. It's civil, and a different standard of proof.

The odds of David being convicted on any of these examples are very small.

Being drunk is different. The defendant in a drunk driving case knows that alcohol can impair him, and as long as its self induced (voluntary), it's not a defense to a crime that requires malice aforethought.

With drunk driving, you would likely get a manslaughter (not murder) charge added to your list of crimes. An exception would be if it was involuntary manslaughter. So if A drugs B's drink, and he drives intoxicated and kills someone, he would not be convicted. Big difference between voluntary and involuntary, though even voluntary intoxication is a defense to some crimes.

The consequences of David's experiment were not known nor foreseeable. It was not reasonable to expect that a metamorphosis would occur based on what happened, nor did David expect to take as much radiation as he did.

David does feel responsible for the creature's actions. That's his nature.

But he never voluntarily induced the transformation except as far as I remember, one time in the lab, and there were no injuries.

We talked about that time David was paralyzed and considered inducing the transformation. Had he done so, and had the creature hurt someone, THEN he could have been liable.

But not as we saw in the pilot. No chance for a conviction, and I would argue the only crimes he would be charged with would be faking his own death and tax evasion.

I'm looking forward to Agent Carter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I challenge you to find one state that would allow a murder conviction without malice aforethought. It's essential.

In 46 states, actually. It's called the Felony Murder Rule:

First, when an offender kills accidentally or without specific intent to kill in the commission of a felony, the offender can be charged with murder. Second, it makes any participant in such a felony criminally liable for any deaths that occur during or in furtherance of that felony.

In the states with the FMR, one of the listed offenses that qualifies under it is fleeing and eluding police. The following scenario is easily foreseeable from our green pal:

- David gets angry.

- David becomes Hulk

- Felonious destruction of property ensues, very likely along with assault. Because that's what happens when the Hulk shows up.

- Cops show up

- Hulk flees. Someone dies, intentionally or not, because of his actions fleeing capture.

Banner is now culpable under the felony murder rule.

It's also similar to an epileptic seizure. If someone has that seizure, and accidentally kills someone during it, he would not be charged with murder.

Epilepsy is not the same as involuntary intoxication in no stretch under law.

Even if it were, as a matter of law, David voluntarily dosed himself.

But you would likely have to prove that David knew that getting angry would put lives in danger and did it anyway.

Easily provable since Banner knows that's the potential outcome every time he gets angry.

There is no jurisdiction in the country that doesn't require it. It's not subjective. To argue otherwise, is simply wrong.

That's not true. See above. To argue otherwise is simply wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone else going to watch Agent Carter?

For sure. Looking forward to it actually.

Me too! It's nice that she wasn't treated as some throw away arm candy for Capt. America and they want to flesh her out a bit. Especially since her and Howard Stark formed SHIELD.

Is anyone else going to watch Agent Carter?

For sure. Looking forward to it actually.

Undecided.

Hayley Atwell is gorgeous (lovely eye candy), but I'm so burned on TV sequels/prequels of comic books that I'd just as soon wait for it on Netflix only if the buzz is any good.

Agents of SHIELD and Gotham both failed to impress and lure me into a weekly series, and I'm not sure this show will be any different.

On the other hand...

tumblr_mmujy3Swai1s4kxaao6_1280.jpghayley-atwell-photo-115.jpg

Mmmmm.... Tuesday night, right? :thumbup:

My jaw literally dropped... wow....she is beautiful. That 1940s look doesn't do her justice.

Is anyone else going to watch Agent Carter?

YES. :)

Awesome! Tell us what you think of it on here when you do. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But not as we saw in the pilot. No chance for a conviction, and I would argue the only crimes he would be charged with would be faking his own death and tax evasion.

And I think another addition(s) to Banner's rap sheet would be a HELL of a lot of property damage; both personal and public...

I challenge you to find one state that would allow a murder conviction without malice aforethought. It's essential.

In 46 states, actually. It's called the Felony Murder Rule:

First, when an offender kills accidentally or without specific intent to kill in the commission of a felony, the offender can be charged with murder. Second, it makes any participant in such a felony criminally liable for any deaths that occur during or in furtherance of that felony.

In the states with the FMR, one of the listed offenses that qualifies under it is fleeing and eluding police. The following scenario is easily foreseeable from our green pal:

- David gets angry.

- David becomes Hulk

- Felonious destruction of property ensues, very likely along with assault. Because that's what happens when the Hulk shows up.

- Cops show up

- Hulk flees. Someone dies, intentionally or not, because of his actions fleeing capture.

Banner is now culpable under the felony murder rule.

It's also similar to an epileptic seizure. If someone has that seizure, and accidentally kills someone during it, he would not be charged with murder.

Epilepsy is not the same as involuntary intoxication in no stretch under law.

Even if it were, as a matter of law, David voluntarily dosed himself.

But you would likely have to prove that David knew that getting angry would put lives in danger and did it anyway.

Easily provable since Banner knows that's the potential outcome every time he gets angry.

There is no jurisdiction in the country that doesn't require it. It's not subjective. To argue otherwise, is simply wrong.

That's not true. See above. To argue otherwise is simply wrong.

Regarding the murder conviction/liability aspect of it?

Let's ALL just agree to disagree on that. We're obviously not changing each other's minds here.

Let's agree to put a bookmark there and save that part of it for the Kobyashi Maru section... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too! It's nice that she wasn't treated as some throw away arm candy for Capt. America and they want to flesh her out a bit. Especially since her and Howard Stark formed SHIELD.

That's what I think I'm looking forward to most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll watch it, seeing as I will have to wait until it finishes to watch SHIELD again anyways! lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me too! It's nice that she wasn't treated as some throw away arm candy for Capt. America and they want to flesh her out a bit. Especially since her and Howard Stark formed SHIELD.

That's what I think I'm looking forward to most.

Hayley Atwell... fleshing out.... mmmm.

tumblr_m1ldq8Q1dT1qeny4b.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would not qualify as felony murder. Again, in order to have a felony, there has to be a crime committed, and there is no intent here. David was not in control of his actions. David would have had to destroy the property willingly. He is not responsible for actions committed by the Hulk given that he has no control. It's a lot like an epileptic seizure.

David was not a participant in the felony. So again, you're simply wrong.

A creative attorney could also argue that the Hulk and David are two separate beings that share a body, given the stark differences in intelligence and personality.

David dosed himself with radiation, but there was NO KNOWLEDGE that the radiation could transform him into a beast.

It's not the same thing as alcohol or drugs, where the effects are commonly known.

The intoxication in this case would be voluntary.

David has no control over whether he transform into the Hulk. Pain also causes it, and sometimes, even nightmares. It's not just anger.

Let's ALL just agree to disagree on that. We're obviously not changing each other's minds here.

Let's agree to put a bookmark there and save that part of it for the Kobyashi Maru section...

It's not really a Kobayshi Maru thing. It's a question of basic understanding of the law, and you either know the law or you don't. But if you want to drop it, I'll drop it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would not qualify as felony murder. Again, in order to have a felony, there has to be a crime committed, and there is no intent here. David was not in control of his actions. David would have had to destroy the property willingly. He is not responsible for actions committed by the Hulk given that he has no control. It's a lot like an epileptic seizure.

David was not a participant in the felony. So again, you're simply wrong.

A creative attorney could also argue that the Hulk and David are two separate beings that share a body, given the stark differences in intelligence and personality.

David dosed himself with radiation, but there was NO KNOWLEDGE that the radiation could transform him into a beast.

It's not the same thing as alcohol or drugs, where the effects are commonly known.

The intoxication in this case would be voluntary.

David has no control over whether he transform into the Hulk. Pain also causes it, and sometimes, even nightmares. It's not just anger.

Let's ALL just agree to disagree on that. We're obviously not changing each other's minds here.

Let's agree to put a bookmark there and save that part of it for the Kobyashi Maru section...

It's not really a Kobayshi Maru thing. It's a question of basic understanding of the law, and you either know the law or you don't. But if you want to drop it, I'll drop it here.

Yes, I'd like you to drop it.

It's going in circles. This isn't discussion; this is talking over each other. Besides, it is unprovable since gamma rays would most likely cause your hair and testicles to fall off, not turn you into a roaring green super powered monster.

NO MORE ON THIS MURDER THING; it's going nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0