AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-01-19, 09:52   Link #21561
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
But here's the thing.

We were never told at any point that the Spectator's Authority by any means was honest, immune to lies/bias what have you, or whatever. Infact, the only use it has seems to be delivering information otherwise impossible to report, like recalling memories from alternate worlds.
One concern: How much does Yasu even know of Kinzo's backstory that Claire could have a biased opinion of it? When was she told and why? Kinzo seemed reluctant to share it at all until Will and Nanjo needled it out of him, and who else would even know?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Then let's talk from a legal standpoint.

Suppose this case: there was a terrorist attack, a bomb exploded in a public area killing several people in the process. Two men are found being involved with this case. One man is responsible for acquiring the explosive, creating the bomb and the remote control, and placing the device on the site. The other man is responsible for pressing the trigger.

From a perfectly legal standpoint, do you think that only the man that actually pulled the trigger will be considered accountable for that massacre?
Again, it completely depends on intention. We are making the assumption that it was Kinzo who assembled, installed, prepared, and armed whatever disastrous thing is under the island. There are far too many nuances here to be sure just how much culpability is involved.

To use your analogy, let's say there's a third person in this scenario. This person is not involved in the conspiracy, but one day while he's in the public area he happens to find the bomb sitting in a trash can, fully armed. He does nothing about it, wanders off, and it later goes off.

You needn't debate his moral culpability in this case; he should have told somebody. The exact extent to which he's legally responsible, though, depends a lot on the law, why he didn't tell anyone, and whether he could have actually done any good if he had. Somebody like that could be charged anywhere from murder to manslaughter, depending on the circumstances. He could also be charged with nothing at all, believe it or not.

Now, since it's hard to imagine this is anything but grossly irresponsible on Kinzo's part, consider that we still aren't entirely sure how he died or if he was even actually dead, at least on Rokkenjima Prime. It's entirely possible he intended to disarm it, or tried to disarm it, or told Genji to disarm it and Genji didn't (which would shift culpability somewhat). It's possible it can't be disarmed. It's possible he deliberately hid it and told Genji not to tell anyone where the mechanism is specifically so it wouldn't go off. In criminal law terms it would be hard to tell, and with most of the evidence destroyed, if Kinzo just keeps his mouth shut like his lawyers would tell him to it'd be hard to make a case against him, even for manslaughter.

The civil proof standard is a lot lower though, and there's a lot of doctrines in property that may or may not apply in Japan, but the idea is that a person can be liable in situations where they may not be criminally guilty.

If I own property, and there's a dangerous condition on my property (such as a big open hole twenty feet deep with no guardrails), I actually owe a duty to anybody I invite onto the property (such as my family members or employees) to tell them about it if I knew about it. So if, say, Gohda's family is suing Kinzo's estate for his death, even if Kinzo isn't criminally culpable for killing Gohda, they can argue (pretty convincingly) that he probably should have told Gohda about the hundreds of tons of explosives he was working over every day which could go off at any time. They would probably get a lot of money from that, if the estate had any money left... which it doesn't.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 10:07   Link #21562
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Stop there Renall.

This discourse starts from the assumption that what was told about this bomb was the truth.
If that was the truth then Kinzo is responsible for setting up the device, and he created it for the very purpose of blowing up the mansion and all of his family should his gambles fail.


If you bring up on the picture a "maybe he didn't know about the device" and so on then I can throw in a "maybe the bomb didn't exist in the first place" and then of course Kinzo is innocent.


Ah and I'd like to point out that according to what was shown in EP8 the only "proof" of this bomb that people from 1998 have is Kinzo's tall talks about this device he created to blow off the island.
If you question this, then you don't even have this "proof".
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 11:26   Link #21563
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
He can't possibly have always intended it to blow up his entire family as Genji's claim of his use of it in ep7 is directly at odds with that. Most of the time, his entire family is not on Rokkenjima; at best, they are present one day of the year, assuming everyone comes to every conference. Anecdotally this appears not to be the case, and of course Battler wasn't attending for many years and Kinzo had no way to force him to return.

There's also the point of "Kinzo set it up to do x; Kinzo didn't do x; someone later came along and did x." Even if everything you say is true, Kinzo did not decide to blow the joint (if indeed he's dead, he can't). Should he have even put that stuff there in the first place? No, it's grossly irresponsible.

But he didn't actually do it. He created a situation which gave someone an opportunity (assuming it was no accident). At best he's an accessory. At worst he was tremendously negligent (in not arranging for the dismantling of the system after his death). But he didn't push the button. The moral and legal culpability for any resulting deaths is squarely in the hands of the person who did so.

Of course, if no one was actually killed in the blast, we have a weird situation where technically the bomber didn't commit murder at all. Reckless endangerment of Eva, perhaps, and definitely disruption of a crime scene, but no murder. Then again, you can't prove after the fact that nobody was killed, unless you want to come forward and tell everyone who really killed everyone and how...
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 11:33   Link #21564
musouka
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
He can't possibly have always intended it to blow up his entire family as Genji's claim of his use of it in ep7 is directly at odds with that. Most of the time, his entire family is not on Rokkenjima; at best, they are present one day of the year, assuming everyone comes to every conference.
The bomb has been there since the island was built. Also, Kinzo hasn't been making business decisions the way he used to for some time. Therefore when he was actually using the bomb with any sort of regularity, it most likely overlapped with when his young children were on the island because they had yet to grow up and get married.

I think the real issue here is that Kinzo wasn't using the bomb as a way to commit murder, he was using the threat of dying to force himself to make important decisions. Likewise, Yasu probably wasn't trying to commit suicide and bring the family along with her, she was using the fear of death to propel her actions. Risky, but not necessarily murderous.
__________________
雨の日も晴れの日も
いつの日も愛してた
それだけは 今もまだ
ずっと変りはしない
musouka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 11:58   Link #21565
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by musouka View Post
Risky, but not necessarily murderous.
It's still criminal.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 11:59   Link #21566
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Endangering people isn't the same as murdering them. It's not even the same as attempting to murder them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by musouka View Post
The bomb has been there since the island was built. Also, Kinzo hasn't been making business decisions the way he used to for some time. Therefore when he was actually using the bomb with any sort of regularity, it most likely overlapped with when his young children were on the island because they had yet to grow up and get married.
His kids are actually fairly old. He has a very narrow window between when the mansion is built (around '52) to when at the very least Rudolf and Eva are in college and Krauss is newly married (sometime in the late 50s). By the early 1960s, the only family members he can regularly endanger are himself, his wife, Krauss and Natsuhi, and Rosa.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 12:05   Link #21567
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Endangering people isn't the same as murdering them. It's not even the same as attempting to murder them.His kids are actually fairly old. He has a very narrow window between when the mansion is built (around '52) to when at the very least Rudolf and Eva are in college and Krauss is newly married (sometime in the late 50s). By the early 1960s, the only family members he can regularly endanger are himself, his wife, Krauss and Natsuhi, and Rosa.
How likely do you think a jury would buy the story that a man who set up 900 tons of explosive to blow up a house didn't actually intend to kill anyone?
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 12:27   Link #21568
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
How likely do you think a jury would buy the story that a man who set up 900 tons of explosive to blow up a house didn't actually intend to kill anyone?
If it can be shown that he's had the 900t or whatever there since the early 1950s and nothing's ever happened, it's certainly plausible that no harm was intended. It's against the law to keep military-grade explosives (at least I assume so), but it's not against the law to be stupid. Foolish possession of dangerous munitions is not prima facie evidence that the owner ever intended to detonate them, let alone to detonate them and hurt anyone.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 13:17   Link #21569
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
You keep pretending that he didn't create an easy to trigger detonation device. That alone would be considered proof of his intention to cause harm.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 13:21   Link #21570
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
You have a funny definition of "easy." Sure, it's easy to do if you know where it is and how to get to it. It's not like he put a big red button in the foyer. Well, I guess you could call the epitaph that, but not really.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 13:24   Link #21571
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Come on now, don't waste my time in pointless straw grasping. Right now we are discussing how it would be plausible that Kinzo created that device without the intention to use it himself.

It was easy for him.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 13:35   Link #21572
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
And he didn't use it, if we accept the notion that he's dead. What's the issue here? He was negligent in leaving it behind for somebody else to discover and use. But it's not the same degree of moral or legal culpability as doing it himself and actually going through with it.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 14:25   Link #21573
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Of course it's not the same culpability. But the intention to kill is by itself a crime pretty close to murder.

Now I actually don't know if the intention to commit a massacre is a more serious crime than the actual murder of a single person. At any rate what we have here is a person that, according to the facts as they were reconstructed by the witch hunters in 1998, planned to commit a massacre in case his gamble failed.

Of course he always was successful so he never pushed the switch. But the volition to commit the act, should a certain event occur, was there.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 14:30   Link #21574
musouka
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Of course he always was successful so he never pushed the switch. But the volition to commit the act, should a certain event occur, was there.
That just makes him a desperate jerk, not a murderer. No one is a murderer until someone is actually dead by their direct actions. It's always possible that Kinzo would wuss out and turn the switch back with one minute to go if it came right down to the wire. It's the same way with Yasu, assuming you don't go by the fake murder theory. She can make all the plans in the world, but we don't know what she would have done when it came to actually shooting the Ushiromiya family.
__________________
雨の日も晴れの日も
いつの日も愛してた
それだけは 今もまだ
ずっと変りはしない
musouka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 14:46   Link #21575
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Is "murder" the only crime that is recognized in your country? If someone isn't a murder then he's just a desperate jerk?
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 15:15   Link #21576
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall
One concern: How much does Yasu even know of Kinzo's backstory that Claire could have a biased opinion of it? When was she told and why? Kinzo seemed reluctant to share it at all until Will and Nanjo needled it out of him, and who else would even know?
A good question she probably learned it thesame way she learned information like the Battler baby switch and what have you. Either Genji knows everything and gives her plot dumps, or her ascension to Meta-Status as the personification of the rules gives her some sort of omniscience, or whatever the fuck.

Maybe Kinzo just told her because she's Beato/Lion and he felt she deserved to know.

Quote:
Is "murder" the only crime that is recognized in your country? If someone isn't a murder then he's just a desperate jerk?
You need to stop losing your temper with people. Whenever you get into these arguments you don't take long to slip into personal attacks.

Kinzo does not have the intent to kill anyone. Legally, not even finding the easy switch (assuming Kinzo did put it there) is proof of an intent to use it, since he never used it.

Moreover, all the evidence would be lost when the bomb does go off, so how could Kinzo be held legally accountable anyway?

Kinzo can only be held to be an irresponsible, emotionally unstable old dude. He can't be tried as a criminal.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 15:33   Link #21577
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Where was the personal attack? I call that sarcasm.

I was very clear in my previous posts that I'm talking about the criminality of Kinzo's action while it being not necessarily a murder. Arguing that Kinzo isn't a murderer doesn't counter my arguments.


Quote:
Legally, not even finding the easy switch (assuming Kinzo did put it there) is proof of an intent to use it, since he never used it.
Here is the very point of this question. Suppose it is proven that a person created a bomb and that he placed in a public place and that he was in possession of the trigger to make it explode. However this man never used it.

What does the law says in this case. Will this many simply get away with it with illegal possession of explosives? Will the people that were threatened to die simply accept this? Will they feel secure at the idea that someone that threatened to blow them off is free to roam and try it again, with the possibility that the second time he won't have second thoughts?
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 16:20   Link #21578
musouka
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Is "murder" the only crime that is recognized in your country? If someone isn't a murder then he's just a desperate jerk?
Renall has already pointed out that Kinzo has some liability. But that is not the same as being a murderer.
__________________
雨の日も晴れの日も
いつの日も愛してた
それだけは 今もまだ
ずっと変りはしない
musouka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 16:42   Link #21579
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
I think we all agree with that. But it seems we do not agree on the amount of Kinzo's liability or on the fact that he has a share of guilt not only for the creation of the device itself but for the massacre that happened later as well.

In other words while I agree that Kinzo cannot be directly accused of being the culprit of the Rokkenjima incident, I claim that he's still partially responsible for that. And this kind of responsibility cannot be put on the same level of a butterfly effect such as Keichi's doll just to make an example. Kinzo's actions directly made the massacre possible and the possibility of such consequence had to be considered by a responsible person.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-19, 17:00   Link #21580
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Here is the very point of this question. Suppose it is proven that a person created a bomb and that he placed in a public place and that he was in possession of the trigger to make it explode. However this man never used it.

What does the law says in this case. Will this many simply get away with it with illegal possession of explosives? Will the people that were threatened to die simply accept this? Will they feel secure at the idea that someone that threatened to blow them off is free to roam and try it again, with the possibility that the second time he won't have second thoughts?
He endangered people. Endangerment is a serious crime, especially if it's an extremely dangerous situation (a bomb would certainly qualify) and he was more than just negligent (since he didn't seem to care who else was on the island or not, he's at least negligent, probably reckless since he knew they'd die if he decided to go out with a bang and never warned anyone). Still, he never actually did it. As far as we know, Genji's story could be an embellishment; perhaps Kinzo often came down and thought about setting the device but never did. Is that endangerment or "inspiration" in an eccentric and dangerous fashion?

Really, like you said, it doesn't matter, but I wouldn't call him "directly responsible." He's proximately responsible; but for his rigging everything up, it wouldn't be there to explode. That's clear. However, without the intervention of an independent party, it would not have exploded (as far as we're told).

That's the nuance. Legally, we call that a break in the chain of causation. If it was going to go off one way or another on Oct. 6, 1986, then he's the actual cause of the blast. Otherwise, he's guilty of recklessly creating a dangerous situation and failing to warn people. But it's the person who flipped the switch who is the direct cause and who we should condemn.

Unfortunately we know little about the intentions of either.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.