What happens if someone from the past shows up...

[Drago-Kazov]

What happens if someone from the past shows up in the enlightened society of the Federation and we know tha he commited crimes by "todays" standards?

What would happen to a temporaly displaced Djingis Khan.

I will let Flint go because him butchering people as Alexander was such a long time ago. But what happens if in the characters life the crimes were fairly recent?

Would that temporarily displaced person stand trial?

Is there a special DTI jury and judge for these people?

I think an episode about this moral question would had made great Trek episode.

What do you guys think?

[Christopher]

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

What happens if someone from the past shows up in the enlightened society of the Federation and we know tha he commited crimes by "todays" standards?

What would happen to a temporaly displaced Djingis Khan.

I will let Flint go because him butchering people as Alexander was such a long time ago.

You just answered your own question. Alexander and Genghis were much alike -- both mighty conquerors who were ruthless to their enemies but benevolent and tolerant to those who accepted their rule, both figures who built the greatest empires of their era and spread civilization widely, and whose successors split their empires into multiple smaller ones. The main difference between them is that Genghis was a lot more successful; his empire was far bigger and lasted far longer. The West glorifies Alexander and demonizes Genghis, but that's simple ethnocentrism; in East Asia, particularly Mongolia, Genghis is revered just as much as Alexander has traditionally been in Europe. ("The Savage Curtain"'s portrayal of Genghis as nothing more than a mute henchman on the "evil" side was probably the most racist thing that ever happened in Star Trek.)

But what happens if in the characters life the crimes were fairly recent?

Would that temporarily displaced person stand trial?

You'll probably find your answer in this post from the Law and the Multiverse blog:

http://lawandthemultiverse.com/2011/...e-limitations/

See also Isaac Asimov's short-short story "A Loint of Paw."

[Drago-Kazov]

The difference between Flint and Genghis is that we can say that Flint had evolved out of being that civilised barbarian who was responsible for the death of thousands. Genghis on the other hand if temporarily displaced had done nothing to redeem himself he did not evolve along with humanity.


I will check out your link.

[E-DUB]

Not to threadjack but I think that the most racist thing in Trek was "Code of Honor", in which the whole "black guy lusting after white woman" thing was played to the hilt.

[Greg Cox]

My understanding is that we ditch them on Ceti Alpha V . . ..

[Timewalker]

Greg Cox wrote:

---

My understanding is that we ditch them on Ceti Alpha V . . ..

Poor Chekov (et al.). Just think of all the jaywalking and trespassing they did back in 20th century San Francisco! McCoy even impersonated a doctor (sort of)! And what about Gillian Taylor? Did she ever have parking tickets? Did she shoplift a chocolate bar when she was a little kid?

Damn, you're cruel to your characters.

[Christopher]

E-DUB wrote:

---

Not to threadjack but I think that the most racist thing in Trek was "Code of Honor", in which the whole "black guy lusting after white woman" thing was played to the hilt.

Well, except it wasn't written that way; in the script, the Ligonians were originally reptilian aliens and the writers based them on samurai culture. The way it turned out has been blamed by some on the director, and there are anecdotes that he treated the guest actors in a racist way and got fired midway through, but the same director went on to do many episodes of In the Heat of the Night, which seems hard to reconcile with those allegations. So at worst, there was racism injected by the director that wasn't in the script. The treatment of Genghis Khan, one of the most effective military and political leaders in the history of the world, as nothing more than a mute thug was there in the writing from the beginning.

[Greg Cox]

Timewalker wrote:

---

Poor Chekov (et al.). Just think of all the jaywalking and trespassing they did back in 20th century San Francisco! McCoy even impersonated a doctor (sort of)! And what about Gillian Taylor? Did she ever have parking tickets? Did she shoplift a chocolate bar when she was a little kid?

Damn, you're cruel to your characters.

And I hear Kirk let some poor woman be hit a truck. Surely that qualifies as negligent homicide or something . . .

[Nerys Myk]

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

What happens if someone from the past shows up in the enlightened society of the Federation and we know tha he commited crimes by "todays" standards?

What would happen to a temporaly displaced Djingis Khan.

I will let Flint go because him butchering people as Alexander was such a long time ago. But what happens if in the characters life the crimes were fairly recent?

Would that temporarily displaced person stand trial?

Is there a special DTI jury and judge for these people?

I think an episode about this moral question would had made great Trek episode.

What do you guys think?

You send them back to their home time ASAP, because they have stuff to do.

[Christopher]

Greg Cox wrote:

---

And I hear Kirk let some poor woman be hit a truck. Surely that qualifies as negligent homicide or something . . .

I don't know about 1930s New York City law, but generally there's no duty to rescue. Law and the Multiverse has covered the subject several times, including here.

The basic assumption in tort law is that there is no duty to rescue. This is important because a defendant cannot be held liable under any negligence theory unless the defendant breached a duty which caused cognizable harm to the plaintiff. Where there is no duty, there can be no negligence. So the fact that Batman looks the other way in the above hypothetical may make him a bad person, but it probably won’t subject him to liability.

There are, however, a few exceptions to the general rule, some of which are at least potentially applicable. First, if a defendant has himself created a hazardous condition, he has a duty to rescue those who are endangered by it. Mundane examples include construction workers digging a hole in the road or lumberjacks felling trees: both have a duty to rescue those endangered by their activities.
...
Second, and this is probably the thornier issue for our heroes, there is a duty to rescue when a “special relationship” exists between plaintiff and defendant. The term has different meanings in different contexts, but what the law means by this is some relationship where one party is taking responsibility for the other in some way.

Maybe you could argue that since Edith was crossing the street because Kirk had done so and she was coming over to see what he was doing, that could mean he created the hazardous condition. But I don't think that would hold up, since it was her own choice to cross the street -- and Kirk did specifically tell her, twice, to stay right there.

And while Kirk may have felt he had a responsibility to Edith, he had no formal responsibility for her in the eyes of the law. If anything, he was the one dependent on her for his room and board.

I'm not sure whether actively preventing someone else from rescuing her would be illegal, though. But in Kirk's case one could argue self-defense, since his action saved himself, his crew, and the entire Federation.

[trekmom]

Zombie Cheerleader wrote:

---

You send them back to their home time ASAP, because they have stuff to do.

What if you can't send them back? Keep in mind that in the "present day" Trek Lit world of approximately 2385ish or so, punishment is on a pretty nice penal colony. Gardens, exercise, fresh air, education and rehabilitation. If we punish past criminals according to "current" law, it will seem like an amazing vacation to them with much better living conditions than they were used to-for the most part. I think they should be prosecuted according to modern day law, so we don't unleash someone with a murderous/criminal past onto Federation society.

[Christopher]

trekmom wrote:

---

What if you can't send them back? Keep in mind that in the "present day" Trek Lit world of approximately 2385ish or so, punishment is on a pretty nice penal colony. Gardens, exercise, fresh air, education and rehabilitation. If we punish past criminals according to "current" law, it will seem like an amazing vacation to them with much better living conditions than they were used to-for the most part. I think they should be prosecuted according to modern day law, so we don't unleash someone with a murderous/criminal past onto Federation society.

Except that along with that more benevolent penal system is a far more sophisticated system for rehabilitating criminals. That's what prison is supposed to do, after all -- not just lock people away for a while, not "punish" them by subjecting them to more trauma which will make them even more dangerous and antisocial when they get out, but reform them so they won't be criminals anymore. The American penal system these days has forgotten that basic principle, but clearly the Federation has remembered it and made it work, because they've successfully banished virtually all crime.

Besides, aren't you conflating two separate parts of the process, prosecution and sentencing?

[Nerys Myk]

trekmom wrote:

---

What if you can't send them back? Keep in mind that in the "present day" Trek Lit world of approximately 2385ish or so, punishment is on a pretty nice penal colony. Gardens, exercise, fresh air, education and rehabilitation. If we punish past criminals according to "current" law, it will seem like an amazing vacation to them with much better living conditions than they were used to-for the most part. I think they should be prosecuted according to modern day law, so we don't unleash someone with a murderous/criminal past onto Federation society.

Well the example is Genghis Khan. Who has a life to lead and things to do before he dies at the time recorded by history. You have to send him back to the time he left or risk screwing up the time line.

Another quandary: What if it's Genghis prior to him committing his crimes? Should be tried for thing he'll do in the future?

[rfmcdpei]

Zombie Cheerleader wrote:

---

Well the example is Genghis Khan. Who has a life to lead and things to do before he dies at the time recorded by history. You have to send him back to the time he left or risk screwing up the time line.

Another quandary: What if it's Genghis prior to him committing his crimes? Should be tried for thing he'll do in the future?

Leaving aside the unethical act of prosecuting someone for crimes that the person has not committed, doing anything that would radically rewrite the history of Earth with completely unknown consequences for the rest of the quadrant is something that the DTI would strictly guard against.

[Timewalker]

Greg Cox wrote:

---

And I hear Kirk let some poor woman be hit a truck. Surely that qualifies as negligent homicide or something . . .

Also, Kirk and Spock stole clothes, assaulted a police officer, Spock stole tools... At least McCoy losing his phaser didn't matter this time, since it was disintegrated along with the bum.

But it's totally McCoy's fault that all that milk and broken glass ended up on the street. I don't blame the bum for being scared and dropping it; how else would somebody feel when a raving lunatic suddenly appears out of thin air?

I never realized what a degenerate bunch of people my favorite crew is!