Mark Forums Read
Saints of Priscilla
Priscilla's "Trial": Angel or Demon?
Trouble logging in?
If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to
reset your password
. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please
do not start posting with a new account
, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via
, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.
Priscilla's "Trial": Angel or Demon?
Awhile back, Shiek and I got into a heated debate about whether Priscilla deserved to die as justice for what she'd done.
Shiek, ever the brave defense lawyer, argued she ought to be forgiven.
Me? Well, even if I dislike the death penalty because it's sometimes wrongly used have to admit Priscilla deserves it. But why does Shiek defend her you ask? Priscilla, as Shiek argues, is not "mentally sane", but "criminally insane" when she commits her acts of horrendous violence. I can understand his point, but I'd like to argue that she deserves death for a different reason. Priscilla is the gravest threat to life on the island, and there is as yet no force capable of stopping her rampages, which may yet happen again.
She is also dangerously mentally unstable at times, and this feeds into problems with her immense power. To date, we know of 3 towns in the North and 1 in the West annihilated by Priscilla's appetite or her destructive nature plus "Hellcats". As such she has not killed one, two, or even dozens, but hundreds and perhaps thousands of people. Not only that, but she killed her own comrades and showed a willingness to take advantage of others' mercy at the cost of their own lives.
Now then, let me explain the rules of this conversation. Shiek, unwittingly until this moment, has been serving as Priscilla's defense lawyer. I have been serving as her prosecutor, even if she is in absentia from the "court". However, one needs to make the judgment on the case as if Prissy was captured and her fate under our control.
If you wish to argue for Priscilla's life, you can do so, but will not be able to vote one way or another on the case. If you argue for my case, the same applies. The "jury" is that of public opinion, or those members of this group who do not argue either way and must make up their minds on who argues their case most persuasively.
I now await Shiek's rebuttal. Please do NOT comment until Shiek is given a chance to defend Prissy first. After all, he named this group "Saints of Priscilla", so here's his big chance to prove she deserves that!
I honestly don't even know if, or what, I should say Revan. This post makes me laugh too much, I'd rather just leave it here untouched
Roflmao, I must say "Your Honor", since I created this group........doesn't that make ME the Judge?
I love it, I can feel the excitement out of you Revan and I'm in a fit of giggles right now
Well, in my defense, my PERSONAL defense, I would like to point out that the name of the group was chosen because I wanted something that represented her, or more accurately, what she thought of herself and what she wanted to become. Obviously, that took kind of a nasty turn, but call it Greek Tragedy, Fallen Angel, or however, their is always a side that wanted to fight in the name of justice.
"Priscilla is the gravest threat to life on the island, and there is as yet no force capable of stopping her rampages, which may yet happen again."
Have to disagree with you there; no matter what, in the end, she has a mind of her own and Raciella does not. She's called the Destroyer for a reason, and she is an unbiased unprejudiced killing machine that will, well, kill until it stops breathing. You're kind of over-reaching if you think anybody, at all, comes close to the threat she capable of.
I said she was "criminally insane"? When did I even say that?
If this is a continuation of a debate we had Revan, It's a bit unfair to suddenly drag it up from months ago and expect me to remember every little detail of it
. As I recall, I wasn't even fully into that debate to begin with, because I was tired from debating with
on something else entirely!
(I feel like Phoenix Wright going up against the "demon prosecutor" Edgeworth
, and I come up with turnabouts when all hope seems lost
If we don't kill Priscilla simply because she used to be an innocent little girl, the we should not even kill the most sadistic mass murders. Everyone was innocent at a certain point of their lifes.
I don't care about the past, i care about the present. I don't care if Priscilla had her family slain, I don't care if Priscilla was tortured and turned into a killing machine by the Organization
I care about what she is doing now!
Clare had her family slain, she was the toy of a filthy Yoma for GOD knows how long, she was most likely raped by that Yoma, she had her family slain
when Priscilla killed Teresa, she was also tortured by the Organization, she was also turned into a monster.
Clare had it worse than Priscilla.
And yet, I don't see Clare going down the same path as her.
Like I already said, I don't care if Priscilla was cute and innocent once. In this chapter, she brutally murdered two sisters. She knew she murdering, she even mocked Beth while she mourned.
Personally, I find this to be extremely amusing but still, it was a crime.
And she shouldn't escape punishment simply because she did not chose to become a monster. She is a monster now and I don't see her showying any signs of regret for the lives that she has claimed only to satiate her endless hunger. If a rabid animal starts killing people, shouldn't we put down that animal?
She deserves to be punished. If she didn't want to become a monster, if she does not want to be a monster, the let's put her out of her misery.
But if she knows that she is murdering, does not regrets it and does not consider that she needs to stop, then she is a threat and a mass murder and should be stopped.
One way or another, I say we should kill her.
You know Hedge, I'm surprised. I've always seen you have a comically extreme negative view on the girl, I didn't think you'd be on the defense
I'm kind of split to be honest on the "charges"; while I don't think she deserves to be killed, punishment of some sort would be tough to beat and, granted, she does deserve it.
Unfortunately, in the world we're talking about, their really isn't a punishment that isn't death, especially with the beings we're talking about.
That's the problem overall; both of you can be said to be taking one extreme and the other, but it can't be helped, their's no "middle-ground" in a trial like this
....That said however, the crimes against her can basically be put on every other Awakened Being, which, as funny as it sounds, is discriminatory. In a way, what it boils down to is; do you attack the rabid animal, like MisterJB said, or do attack the guy who let him off the leash?
Personally, I go with the latter.
Revan asked me if, she was forgiven, let go, and comitted another crime, would anyone forgive me? Well, that's not my choice is it? It's theirs. I made the choice to let her go. If she goes off, I would go to her and try to resolve what happened. I got more important things to worry about after all then whether people like or hate me.
she fought for what she believed was the right thing, she wanted to protect humans from Yoma, she had an intense hatred of them and wanted to protect others from going through what she did, of losing her entire family. She did not understand the Organizations's true agendas, but she fought for what they supposedly stood for, the protection of humanity. I believe Awakened Beings physical form reflects their personality and who they are:
Isley was a soldier, a tactician, a military master, so his Awakened Form resulted in many weaponry, and most of all, a form of a proud centaur which are usually portrayed as noble creatures.
Rigardo was savage to say the least, blood-thirsty and berserk in battle, so his form of the King of the Jungle, the Lion, is quite perfect.
And Priscilla's, for all the reasons I listed, is a Fallen Angel. Angels are about as 'saintly' as it gets.
My feelings on her, to be honest, is the same I try to have for all murderers and those responsible for heinous crimes:I would like to understand them, I would like to know them inside and out and find out all the who/what/where/why/how on the murders, specifically the how and why. I don't want to kill and burn them for what they've done until I got their psychology under my thumb and full understanding of everything. Childish as it may sound, it's always better then jumping to talk about morality, good and evil, and whatnot when you don't understand the person.
I see her as a little girl who deserves
for crimes and horrors she never intended. Every Awakened Being is the same as her, but her humanity is the most profound over all as her human personality is completely different then the beast that awoke inside of her. Monsters don't cry, monsters don't protect, monster's don't love and she's done all three. She fought Yoma to protect humanity and killed her comrades through her awakening which she didn't intend.
Revan asked me if I was Claire, would I personally forgive her:
Continued from my post, because for some reason, it got cut off
Revan asked me if I would personally forgive someone who was responsible for, let's say, murder of someone important in my life, let's say a family member. A part of me would probably always feel anger towards them for what they've done, probably totally in the beginning, but if I understood them, if I knew everything that happened like the back of my hand, if they truly were not at fault, then that would wane.
It would wane in time regardless because it's crushing to hold such anger and a grudge inside you for many years, it's self-killing, because in the end, whether or not I hate them wouldn't change the fact that I can't change what has happened and neither can they.
Would I forgive them? the chance is there, yes. I'm willing to give it 50/50 at the most which is huge considering some people have no problem hating the perpetrator for life. I'm not like that, I HAVE to live and let go because it's the only way you can live. I can't spend my life hating someone forever. I have to let go of what happened and part of that means forgiving the person who did it, if only just a little.
Everyone is gray in my book, including myself and most of the time, even if they commit something atrocious, I keep them there. They're human beings Revan, just like I am. At the end of the day, that's what they remain and that's all they are. I can call them whatever horrific names I want, it doesn't change. People all too easily forget that.
That's the thing about making choices in life; their gets to a point where it doesn't matter if anyone forgives you or not. You can't keep making bad choices and hope that people forgive you, that's silly. That's partly why this whole arguement on "forgiveness" is silly, because even me, agrees that she deserves some sort of punishment. The difference however, is whether or not she deserves redemption, whether or not she deserves a chance to make up for what she did.
Isley does not deserve forgiveness, he's responsible for ruining the lives of people across the island. But did he deserve redemption? We'll never know because he's dead, but it started to look like a Yes. More time, and who knows the choices he would have made. If you believe he sent Raki and Priscilla away to protect them, just consider that; for once, he fought to protect and save people, rather then destroy and conquer.
That's about all I can say; most likely a unique look on things, but I'm not bragging.
I would, for the record, like to point out that it is my belief that, sooner or later, she'll revert into a half-awakened state. I don't know how, but it's been my theory for a long while, and I still see it possibly happening. I do not believe she will stay a full AB forever.
To end my point of view, members of the jury(
), I know and aware that my point of view is a unique one. All I can say to finally end this, is that, after all the screen-time and tears, I hope she gets, at least, something of a happy ending like all the others. Gangsta calls it cliched, but I'm not complaining.
Many would be offended by your words, Hege. To me, they out a smile on my face.
But still, have in mind that those insults and acusations would not be tolerate on a real trial.
We are not here to judge the Organization. We're here to decide if we should forget the many deaths that Priscilla caused.
Priscilla is not a victim. She is not an innocent girl like my collegue here wants you to think.
Priscilla is a sadistic, flesh eating monster. She is not possessed by a demon who is dictating her actions. Her mind migth have been perverted upon her Awakening but her arctions and her choices and Priscilla's only, not anyone's elses. If you really believe that Priscila does not has a "mind left to cry or shudder at what the demon is doing in her body with her body", the shouldn't we destroy that demon? Should we not finish Priscilla's misery by finishing her life of murder and Destruction?
The matter of fact is that Priscilla ignored or even enjoyed Beth's suffering, she slaugthered dozens of villages in the past just to feed herself. She even went as far as to canibalize her own species.
Priscilla did all of this. Not the Organization. The Organization is evil but Priscilla is evil still.
Doesn't Alicia and Beth deserve justice? Doesn't Clare, Teresa, Ophelia, her brother, Irene, Noel, Sophia and thousands of nameless families who were sacrificed just to satiate Priscilla's endless hunger deserve justice?
Are we just supossed to forget about those deaths and suffering? Are we supossed to froget that Priscilla has shown signs of sadism, that she is mentally unstable and that she can kill anyone, whenever she feel like?
I say no! I say that if the citizens of the Continent want to keep their families safe, then they should condem Priscilla to death. Who knows when she will snap again and destroy another village?
KIll Priscilla and then, only then can we focus on the Organization. Only then can we focus on saving other innocent, little girls.
For this one girl, Priscilla, is already beyond redemption and beyond salvation.
But shiek, doesn't a rabi dog should be put down before it bites someone?
I completely agree with MisterJB. We cannot go around treating Priscilla as if she's a human and this is a human murder trial. When you argue a case regarding something as monstrous as what Priscilla now is, I say mitigating circumstances don't apply.
Arguing for her innocence and release just sounds ridiculous. Your arguments, Shiek and Hegie, reminded me of this video:
Sir Lancelot in that video (in this case I guess representing Prissy) rescues the feminine prince (Raki) from his wedding (Organization's hybridization).
Shiek in this case represents the King, "This is Sir Lancelot, a very brave and powerful knight from the Knights of the Round Table, and my honored guest here today."
Commoner: "He just killed my auntie!"
King Shiek: "Now, now, this is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not get hung up on who killed who".
It just all seems so ridiculous. No one in their right mind would allow Priscilla's release, because allowing her to kill again would be an unforgivable offense. That at least both of the "defense lawyers" ought to be able to see. I would argue that the defense presented that the "Destroyer" ought to be destroyed because it's an implacable threat to life misses the point.
The Destroyer, just like Priscilla, deserves to be destroyed. Unlike Priscilla it has no consciousness, so apparently Shiek and Hegie have no problems with destroying it. However "poor" 3X an Abyssal One Priscilla is apparently less of a threat to them, even if she has killed FAR MORE PEOPLE. Let's see, one SuperAbyssal One equal to 2 Abyssal Beings in overall strength (if not more because its strength is concentrated in one being) versus a SuperAbyssal One equal to probably 3 Abyssal Ones in strength.
One of them has no interest in life (the Destroyer) while the other has a great interest in living (Priscilla) and is known to have immense rampages to satisfy her hunger pangs. Which would I destroy first? The one more likely to annihilate all life on the continent, namely Priscilla. The Destroyer's spawn don't live long, and presumably it has a limited range of spawning them away from itself. It also will die off once it has exhausted its yoki, which Priscilla has refused to do. My answer, in short, is to kill both, but to place the greatest priority on wiping out Priscilla, who has killed far more people.
"But shiek, doesn't a rabi dog should be put down before it bites someone?"
Here's the trick MisterJB - their is a person breeding rabid dogs, what's the point?
Even if you did kill the dog, what difference would it make in the long run?
I would like to point though Revan, that 'Super Abyssal" is one of 2xAO.....when it comes to 3xAO or above, I like the term "Hyper"
"We cannot go around treating Priscilla as if she's a human and this is a human murder trial. When you argue a case regarding something as monstrous as what Priscilla now is, I say mitigating circumstances don't apply."
Sounds alot like eye for an eye, pretty extreme Rev.
Regardless of whether or not a person calls someone a "monster"(in this case, litterally
), they are still human and much be judged in a court of law all the same. You can change the consequences depending on the severity of the crime, but you can't alter the system depending on the type of trial and crime. It must be the same throughout, with both sides given a fair and equal chance, otherwise your judicial system is crippled, and we're back to the olden days where people are burned out of fear and ignorance, and innocents are killed.
"Sounds a lot like an eye for an eye, pretty extreme Rev".
Priscilla's the equivalent of a weapon of mass destruction in the medieval world. This should be less about how many people she's killed and more about the general threat to life she poses. Even if we were to be "forgiving", no one ought to release Priscilla because it would mean eventually people somewhere would wind up dying horrifically. She's a walking time bomb Shiek, not a human being. Riful put it best:
What I'm saying is that legally and biologically Shiek, we cannot regard Priscilla as human, because she isn't. She might have once been human, but those days were over ten to twelve years ago. This is not about killing Priscilla out of ignorance or fear, but because if we don't she'll kill thousands of innocents again if we don't kill her first. It is after all only a matter of time..."Bird's gotta eat, fish gotta swim" kind of thing. Priscilla has to eat, and her only known food source besides bad-tasting Awakened Ones is humanity. From where I'm standing, even if you regard her as human, the danger she poses to public safety means one cannot afford to let her live. Too many lives are counting on Priscilla being killed off for me to even consider releasing her. As Riful says, to humans, half-yoma like Claymores aren't that different from Awakened Beings; it is all a matter of consciousness. For all intents and purposes Priscilla is another species, and the law here is clear. Protecting human life at the cost of other species is VERY MUCH LEGAL. I don't care how you justify it, Priscilla is still like a armed nuclear warhead waiting to go off in every village, city and town she visits.
No sane public safety officer or military official could ignore that in their sentencing of her. Say what you like about her "redemption", I prefer the option that doesn't risk thousands of innocent lives on hopes of "redemption".
.........Why on earth can't we Quote in clubs? Is that so bad? -_-
Well, Revan, I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens. Everything we're talking about is based on what we know so far, and things change quickly. I'm betting that she'll revert to a half-awakened state before it's all over, and even if she doesn't, the possibility of being more then just a mass-murderer is still there.
All we can really do, is wait and see what happens.
"Who's the monster?" The Prosecution believes the public is going to think we're all a bunch of unsympathetic monsters for the victims of Priscilla if we didn't prosecute her. Let's face facts then on Priscilla, shall we?
1.) Involuntarily became a Claymore after her family was killed
2.) Had mental stability issues as she became a warrior and when she was assigned to kill Teresa
3.) Chose to kill Teresa and awaken rather than die
4.) Awakening resulted in the deaths of thousands of people and annihilates three entire northern towns
5.) Attacked by first Rigardo, then defeats him. Attacked once more but by Isley, who is also defeated and swears allegiance to a "Hyperabyssale One" that has reverted to a child-like state.
6.) Meets Raki and says "this kid smells nice", thus saving his life from consumption
7.) Travels with Isley and Raki into the South; saves Isley's life from Riful
8.) Lives with Isley and Raki for seven years, never eating a single human
9.) In the village of Titcherei, she encounters the Hellcat offspring of the Destroyer, and presumably either the Hellcats eat the villagers or she does alongside them
10.) Kills the Organization's top two warriors, No. 1 Alicia and No. 2 Beth for reasons unknown
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury of Animesuki's Claymore fan community, this is not about an innocent, poor little girl. Those days are long past. What Priscilla became ten years ago was not done involuntarily but by a mentally imbalanced half-human. She then became a species that is as close to non-human as is possible, an Awakened Being. Despite what the defense says of her redeeming nature, she was and is a mass murderer. She kills for food, and no matter what else we know of her nature, MUST EAT human flesh in order to live. It is also known that only one other entity on the island can possibly challenge her, and it deserves destruction according to the defense.
Ladies and Gentlemen, whereas the defense believes in ONLY destroying the threat to life the soul-less Destroyer represents, an even greater mass murderer, Priscilla, is to be let free and never to face justice for her horrendous crimes. It is true the girl was involuntarily conscripted into the Organization's ranks of female warriors. It is true that the manner in which they allowed the Yoma to kill her family was also horrific and inflicted serious long-term mental health problems on Priscilla.
But it is also true that the moment Priscilla chose to kill her target, Teresa, and awaken rather than die as required by Organization by-laws she was no longer an innocent. She also was no longer human, and proceeded to annihilate three northern towns and eat their thousands of inhabitants. Josef Stalin once said that the loss of one life was a tragedy, the death of thousands a statistic. The defense is hoping that you will be numbed by the sheer number of atrocities the defendant has committed and not focus on little girls like the Organization's late No. 4, Ophelia, whose lives were destroyed by the defendant's actions.
They say Priscilla can be redeemed, but have we ever heard a statement of regret from the defendant? I certainly cannot recall one.
The defense says that the Organization turned the defendant into a monster, but whose choice was it to awaken? If you are handed a match, do you automatically become a pyromaniac?
The defense argues that we, the prosecution, are like blood-obsessed hounds after Priscilla's head. I submit to you that we are here on the behalf of the thousands of victims of Priscilla whose voices were silenced. We are here for the little boys and girls who lost their parents in those days. We are here for the parents who left to come back and find their lives, their children, and their spouses had been cruelly taken from them. We are not here representing a violent mob, because the defendant cruelly killed all of that mob twelve years ago.
The defense asks that you release the defendant on the faith that she will be on good behavior. The prosecution believes the results of the defendant's past acts speak for themselves.
We do not ask this in bloodlust, but in a hard reality that teaches us tragedy will strike once more if we do not act. We are not killing a tragic, innocent girl, but executing an Awakened Being that has shown no regret of the lives it has ended. We are asking you to destroy a weapon that sure as the son rises will eat humans once more. We are asking you to terminate the defendant before there is no human life on the continent left to protect.
The defense maintains that the defendant should be released on mitigating factors of human evil, mental instability, and their faith in the defendant's redemption. We only wish the defense could bring the dead back to life as well. You know which way you must vote. Vote to save humanity before there's no humanity left on the continent at all...
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I must post this rebuttal of the defense's incredible remarks about humanity.
The defense says that "the animal world annihilates" and "punishes humanity for all the animals the humans eat to live". The defense says that we are a vile breed of sinners deserving of death, because we "even...murder for sport!"
The defense argues that the killing of thousands of innocent humans by Priscilla was morally acceptable because "only humans commit murder and are murderers."
The defense says that "HUMANS ARE BY FAR THE MOST GUILTY AND DESERVING OF PUNISHMENT, GOING BY YOUR OWN WORDS REVAN5".
We of the prosecution believe that while the collective actions of humanity are often vile, their acts ought to be individually judged. Humanity cannot be killed as a collective karma for SOME of its members' actions. We had to ask ourselves while reading the defense's statement why the defense would insist on such a defense of its client.
We were shocked to realize what that reasoning was. The defense maintains that the Prosecution is full of bloodlust for the defendant. We maintain that anyone who says that humanity is a "much worse menace then priscilla, HUMANITY! SENTENCE HUMANITY TO DEATH" is far more bloodthirsty than we are. I ask the members of the jury to look at the evidence of passion and anger in this trial, and it will only point towards a vindictive defense bent on denying justice to the survivors of the defendant's atrocities by justifying it through the actions of a limited number of humans.
The defense asks that we consider how many lives the human bandits took before Teresa ended their lives. Indeed, we regret that vigilantism was necessary for such a thing, as their is no central government or law enforcement on the island. While regrettable, it is doubtful we will ever know how many they killed and has nothing to do with the trial of the defendant.
We of the prosecution ask that you consider ONLY the facts of the case. We are not here to collectively judge humanity when it is not cannot be judged as a collective whole. What we are here for is the forty year-old tailor and his six children who died when the defendant mercilessly destroyed his village. We're here for the little girl who the defendant left orphaned and was forced into the Organization's servitude and transformed into a sadistic warrior.
We are here for the innocent little boys and girls killed by the defendant, for the countless parents who were taken from little girls as the defendant destroyed their lives all around them, the grandparents who were awaiting the visits of their grandchildren.
The defense would have you believe that all these people deserved their fates, that justice was served with the defendant acting as a divine prosecutor of human sin. We ask the jury if a three year-old boy is guilty of anything horrible? Is a one month old baby whose life the defendant cruelly ended by killing her parents a horrible sinner? Is the kindly old barber who never left his village and raised a big happy family a great sinner?
The defense would tell you that their lives were deservedly taken away, that humanity needed to be punished for its sins. If this is divine punishment, it can only be the work of a god with no sense of justice or morals. For within the deceased victims of the defendant there were both sinners and innocent, and we maintain it was NOT the defendant's right to act as their judge.
No, rather, we ask that you act as the defendant's judge. The facts are irrefutable. We all know the defendant is a mass murderer. We all know that the defendant must eat humans in order to survive. We all know the defendant has shown no signs of regret for her actions. We also know that until you decide the defendant's sentence, the thousands of souls whose lives she destroyed will not feel justice. No indeed, the defense wishes the defendant never face justice but rather that we forgive her sins. We of the prosecution believe that the atrocities committed by the defendant are not in fact forgivable. You have one of two choices, either you let the continent's greatest mass murderer free to commit the same acts that see her before us, or you do what is right and bring her to justice for the untold numbers of crimes she has committed against humanity.
The prosecution asks anyone who ever questioned the surety of our moral standing can only sit back and look at the appalling morals of the defense. The defense argues that Priscilla's destruction of six year-old boys, seventy year old men, and everyone in between was "punishment of the court of the entire world and all of life".
We of the prosecution wonder if the defense has forgotten their own words about the real guilty party being the Organization and its handlers. Surely, if this was divine punishment, at least the guilty party would have been punished? But no, the defendant did not seek out the Organization, whose guilt of evil offenses the defense has yet to prove to the General Court of Rabona. Rather the defendant went into three northern villages and over the course of a week annihilated more than a thousand victims and left the few female orphans to fall into the Organization's hands.
If this is divine punishment, somewhere above the victims must be wondering what they did to deserve it. For those poor souls, this "divine punishment" must surely seem a mockery. It is more a mockery of justice than anything else.
Before you the killer of six year old boys, of mother and fathers, of grandparents and evil and innocent alike is standing. It was not for her to judge her victims, nor is it for us to judge them, deceased as they are now. The defense has taken to ever more extreme shouting and irrational arguments in the hopes you will find them persuasive.
Clearly you the jury and the defense alike have judged that those arguments have failed. As they say, the defense is in desperate times. Our solid prosecution of the guilty defendant means they are calling for increasingly desperate measures.
anyways.... i give up and am bored of this now... and its only like the 2 of us or sometimes 4 of us... (and its clearly 3v1, no matter how hard i try to make good posts, none of the three of you care anyways)
forgot that word you used, syerstierian or whatever. (the "endless" word)
i give up, you "won". be happy go brag. i'm too old for such silliness.
i made my points and maybe they were poorly done, but i'm proud of the content of my posts. i made good points regardless of how well or not i convey them in such a way that people agree with.
so enjoy the win, this was fun at first, but meh. just two people arguing back and forth is silly.
"winning" has long since become immature to me. so please take it. the win is all yours. i have no interest in such a childish thing.
competition-competing socially bragging and trying to raise one's status.
silly, childish, and immature.
it was fun at the start, but i didn't realize at the time of how limited-shallow it would actually turn in practice.
you won revan5, go tell everyone how special you are.
watches revan as if he was a little kid.... to be young... hard to say if ignorance is bliss or not.
revan and priscilla are quite similar in their view of the world. how amusing. chuckles.
We of the prosecution must ask why, since the defense has not presented any proof, why it posits the Organization is made up of humans? If they are made up of humans, why is it then a significant number of members do not age?
maybe shiek will take over for priscilla, as she is without a lawyer now.
since i don't see revan or misterjb doing so.
The prosecution provided Shiek as lawyer for Priscilla to start this trial. It is his responsibility to defend her, and not the prosecution's fault he is not doing so.
HK found out he's not cut-out to be a lawyer. HK's performance was embarassing!
though, i'd be interested in seeing, you revan, try to defend priscilla. curious as to how you would try to go about it... since i did such a lousy job, it'd be interesting to see how you would tackle her defense, as you do a much better job at this law-legal stuff...
personally, i see defending priscilla as near impossible and that was before you even made your posts revan, priscilla is quite BEEPED if it did come to a court trial for her....
but, maybe you could come up with a way to defend her...
to further embarass myself... (glutton for punishment, lol)
the only possible defense i can see is to:
try to separate priscilla from the demon inside of her.
separate the demon's HEINOUS-criminal actions from priscilla's RIGHTEOUS-innocent actions
get the jury to see that priscilla commited no crimes, and it was all the demon's doing inside of her who did all the death and destruction.
some kind of insanity defense. priscilla wasn't in control-consent with herself. she was overpowered by this demon inside of her. she was not acting on her own accord. like sleep walking or something, except actually being possesed.
get the jury to see that there is actually TWO beings inside priscilla. herself and the demon. show the jury that it was the demon who was in control of her body when she did those atrocious actions...*
well this is the only way i can really see at trying to mount a defense for her not being found directly guilty and get executed. best best is to convince the jury that she didn't have control of herself. insanity or whatever, and have her go to life imprisonment in a "hospital" instead of execution or life in prisonment in jail-prison.
*there's actually this really cool movie that does just this...
(1996) with Richard Gere
*spoiler below* (GRR no spoiler tag on social groups i guess)
but i can kinda remember a summary...
there's like this rural church alter boy. well the priest he worked for was a pedo, and "abused" him.
this boy was super super nice and kind and harmless. he had a terrible stuttering though, and was especially submissive towards women.
well, the movie starts off with him being in the defendant's chair charged with the gruesome murder of this priest.
well they find a tape of the priest's sex acts, but the prosecutor establishes that the defendant snaps from being the victim in these sex acts and murders the priest.
well the protagonist of this movie, the defense lawyer, is in deep (BEEP).
well the defense lawyer, has his female assistant press his client for more information, cuase he's out of options..
she keeps asking him about the incident... he doesn't wanna answer... suddenly something happens...
his studdering stops and he's extremely rude and dominant to the female assistant. She is scared to death and yells for help.
well the guards and the defense lawyer rush in... the client goes back to his old self, crying.
she tells her boss what happens. he pushes his client and gets the same response... and BINGO!
he knows the female prosecutor... they were actually dating in the past....
he tricks her and puts his client on the stand...
she pushes him... just like the defense lawyer knew she would... and his OTHER SIDE COMES out for the jury to see before their eyes.
his client is found to be insane or duel personality or whatever it is called and the jury rules their verdict that way.
really cool movie!!! though sorry for spoiling it... if you were interested in seeing it...
i think that the protagonist, the defense lawyer, was indeed richard gere (or whatever his name is), pretty sure of it.
"The prosecution provided Shiek as lawyer for Priscilla to start this trial. It is his responsibility to defend her, and not the prosecution's fault he is not doing so."
Roflmao, I said everything I wanted to say. As funny as this is, I'm surprised it's still going on.
Page 1 of 3
Mark This Discussion Read
Mark This Discussion Read
All times are GMT -5. The time now is
-- AnimeSuki Default
-- AnimeSuki Default (Contacts Highlighted)
-- AnimeSuki Default (Original Navigation)
-- AnimeSuki Compressed
-- AnimeSuki Blue
-- AnimeSuki Blue (Reordered)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.