Why was it necesarry to prove Data's sentience?

[Christopher]

As a lawyer with a specialty in international law, including human rights, I'd start with the "trial" itself -- assuming, of course, that our dear, shiny Federation is based on such principles. Not that I assume the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is still in effect (after the Eugenics War it probably went into a vault) but basic principles should still be intact, including the right to counsel of one's choice.

Well, keep in mind that this wasn't a Federation matter but a Starfleet matter. This was a military court convened to determine a matter of military, not civilian, law. (Which is why, in VGR: "Author, Author" years later, the Doctor still had to fight for his rights of personhood in a civilian court. Louvois's ruling only applied to Starfleet policy.)

I mean -- Picard and Riker??? Not only do they not have a clue (to paraphrase Tom Paris, "I'm a pilot, not a lawyer") but they are seriously conflicted -- in the legal sense -- and no court on THIS planet would ever pick them to conduct a hearing of this importance.

From my research into the matter (for writing my TNG novel The Buried Age, which dealt with the Stargazer court-martial), there is precedent for assigning officers as counsel in a hearing or court-martial pertaining to people under their command. And conflict of interest doesn't apply, again because we're dealing with a military rather than a civilian court. If you're an officer and you're ordered to prosecute your best friend, you set aside any personal feelings and obey those orders to the best of your ability, or else you're guilty of dereliction of duty. (This is why it was kosher to appoint Louvois to prosecute her lover, Picard, for the loss of the Stargazer.)

Somebody in the thread mentioned the right to resign. Well, yes. I recall one of the actual directives of the Federation (I'm too lazy to look it up) is a prohibition of slavery. If you don't need to prove sentience, and Data is a member of Starfleet -- his pips and evident series of promotions would seem to confirm that he is -- he can get out. It ain't a cult, and the matter should not come before a court at all.

But that's predicated on the assumption that Data is a person rather than a piece of equipment -- and that's the very question of fact that they were seeking to resolve. If Data is equivalent to a human or Vulcan crewmember, then yes, it's slavery. If he's equivalent to a library computer, then no, it isn't. The whole point of the hearing was to determine which of those was the case.


The only real credibility issues I found with this episode in my research pertained to its treatment of the Stargazer court-martial. Namely, there shouldn't have been a court-martial at all. The dialogue claimed that a court-martial is routine when a captain loses a ship, but that's incorrect. What's routine is a preliminary hearing to determine whether a court-martial is necessary.

 

[Use of Time]

Christopher, wouldn't the nature of Data's rights and discrimination in this matter kind of transcend military law and warrant a more formal deliberation. I wonder if there is an equal opportunity office in Starfleet similar to today's military. That could have been a good stalling tactic used by CAPT Picard to get this hearing moved closer to Earth where he might be able to bring more attention to what was happening. He could have tried to involve the EO office to drag out the matter of whether Data was being discriminated against because he was not an organic officer.

 

[Christopher]

^Maybe, but they only had 42 minutes and a limited guest-star budget. Credibility has to take a back seat to the realities of TV production.

 

[Sci]

Christopher, wouldn't the nature of Data's rights and discrimination in this matter kind of transcend military law and warrant a more formal deliberation.

I'm not sure what you mean by "more formal." Military law and courts-martial are just as formal as the civilian judicial system. They are just as legally binding upon members of the armed forces, and their sentences -- including the death penalty -- can be just as harsh, or worse. Military law is just as real, just as legitimate, and just as formal, as civilian law.

Perhaps you mean to say "more universal," since military law only applies to members of the armed forces?

I wonder if there is an equal opportunity office in Starfleet similar to today's military. That could have been a good stalling tactic used by CAPT Picard to get this hearing moved closer to Earth where he might be able to bring more attention to what was happening. He could have tried to involve the EO office to drag out the matter of whether Data was being discriminated against because he was not an organic officer.

This sounds to me liked it is premised both on the assumption that Data is a legal person rather than property (which is itself in contention), and on the assumption that the Federation Starfleet has a military law or regulation prohibiting it from engaging in discrimination against artificial intelligences. If there is no legal prohibition against discrimination against AIs, then the EOO may have no jurisdiction.

 

[Alpha Flyer]

Great discussion. One of these days I will take some time and learn the "clip and quote" system on this site. (I'm still new here ...)

Difference between military and civilian law/courts: Yes, absolutely. In matters of procedure, and you make a good point about conflict of interest regarding prosecution/defence. That said, the entitlement to competent counsel -- ie someone with a basic knowledge of the law -- is a fundamental right, without distinction between the type of court; assuming fundamental *human* rights form a basis of the Federation constituting documents, they would cover both Starfleet and military regulations and legal systems. (In fact the US Combatant Status Review Tribunals in GTMO have been criticized on precisely this point, incompetent counsel being assigned, but I digress.)

The difference between the Doctor's and Data's cases exceeds that of any distinction between military and civilian fora; Data is a member of Starfleet with successive ranks assigned through promotion. The Doctor is a hologram without rank or prior status in Starfleet.

My point on Data's role in Starfleet is this: if the issue is his right to resign, then we would need to look at the definition in the Starfleet regulations of "member of Starfleet". If there isn't one that includes a line "must be sentient being", then sentience is not an issue, because the prima facie indicia are all in place -- Academy attendance, length and continuity of service, rank, promotion ... The argument would be that Starfleet cannot have it both ways -- use him like a member, and then claim he isn't one. (From what I recall of the episode that is an element of Picard's defence, but it's made on an emotional rather than a legal level since he doesn't have the tools of the trade.)

Basically, there are huge holes and continuity problems in the legal system created by the ST writers (a creation that usually happened on an ad hoc basis, to serve a plot) and if anyone were to pay me, I'd happily fly a starship through them one by one.

 

[Mutai Sho-Rin]

Remember guys, this is a TV show we're discussing, not a PHD thesis in jurisprudence. This was THE episode that sold me on TNG and a lot of gnat straining certainly won't make it any less enjoyable. Carry on.

 

[Christopher]

The difference between the Doctor's and Data's cases exceeds that of any distinction between military and civilian fora; Data is a member of Starfleet with successive ranks assigned through promotion. The Doctor is a hologram without rank or prior status in Starfleet.

Just my point. Since Louvois's ruling pertained to an officer of Starfleet, that explains why the Doctor had to appeal for his rights as a civilian separately.

My point on Data's role in Starfleet is this: if the issue is his right to resign, then we would need to look at the definition in the Starfleet regulations of "member of Starfleet". If there isn't one that includes a line "must be sentient being", then sentience is not an issue, because the prima facie indicia are all in place -- Academy attendance, length and continuity of service, rank, promotion ... The argument would be that Starfleet cannot have it both ways -- use him like a member, and then claim he isn't one.

Ideally, yes, but the law is not an ideal, flawless entity. It's a collection of different laws from different eras and serving different agendas, and despite everyone's best efforts, sometimes laws will contradict each other or be badly enough written to make their interpretation ambiguous, and that's where the judicial system has to get involved and try to figure out what the laws actually mean. And that's what happened here. We had the Starfleet ruling that Data should be treated like any other officer conflicting with the Acts of Cumberland which said he was Starfleet property. The hearing was necessary to reconcile the conflicting language of the laws and determine which one took precedence.

 

[Alpha Flyer]

Remember guys, this is a TV show we're discussing, not a PHD thesis in jurisprudence. This was THE episode that sold me on TNG and a lot of gnat straining certainly won't make it any less enjoyable. Carry on.

Kind of my point, too -- it' a TV show where they are making stuff up as they go along. In the meantime, picking nits off what they did make up is a fun diversion on a rainy Friday.

Carrying on ... ;-)

AF

PS: Excited to find out that I got the quote thing right this time.

 

[Use of Time]

Remember guys, this is a TV show we're discussing, not a PHD thesis in jurisprudence. This was THE episode that sold me on TNG and a lot of gnat straining certainly won't make it any less enjoyable. Carry on.

Come on now. Just because this thread became somewhat academic and the topic is a little bit heavier doesn't mean we all deserve the "it's just a T.V. show" remark. I think everybody here is aware that the writers were not as concerned with passing the bar exam than giving us an entertaining 45 minutes of television.

 

[R. Star]

"Data is a toaster!"

Yeah, I'd argue for a change of venue for that line alone to say nothing of the short comings of the "legal staff" there.

 

[Use of Time]

Christopher, wouldn't the nature of Data's rights and discrimination in this matter kind of transcend military law and warrant a more formal deliberation.

I'm not sure what you mean by "more formal." Military law and courts-martial are just as formal as the civilian judicial system. They are just as legally binding upon members of the armed forces, and their sentences -- including the death penalty -- can be just as harsh, or worse. Military law is just as real, just as legitimate, and just as formal, as civilian law.

Perhaps you mean to say "more universal," since military law only applies to members of the armed forces?

I wonder if there is an equal opportunity office in Starfleet similar to today's military. That could have been a good stalling tactic used by CAPT Picard to get this hearing moved closer to Earth where he might be able to bring more attention to what was happening. He could have tried to involve the EO office to drag out the matter of whether Data was being discriminated against because he was not an organic officer.

This sounds to me liked it is premised both on the assumption that Data is a legal person rather than property (which is itself in contention), and on the assumption that the Federation Starfleet has a military law or regulation prohibiting it from engaging in discrimination against artificial intelligences. If there is no legal prohibition against discrimination against AIs, then the EOO may have no jurisdiction.

When I say more formal I'm essentially talking about giving Data an actual defense attorney and not have his prosecutor be his first officer. Not to mention that the judge seems to have a contraversial history with his "lawyer" so to speak. This whole thing screams inappropriate to me.

Edited: And yeah let's take that line that Star just brought up when she says "Data is a toaster."

If I were Data I would be doing everything in my power to get this thing to Earth somehow.

Here is something else I would do If I were Data. I would try to write my "congressman" so to speak and get the story out to the public. I feel like a decision like that would warrant a lot of media attention and would outrage a lot of people. I wouldn't want this taking place on some remote Starbase.

 

[Mojochi]

Good post. One of the things we have discussed ad nauseum in this thread is the premise of the trial but not the reasons why it had to happen in such a ridiculous fashion. I refuse to believe a case as serious as that one would have been delegated to some half assed kangaroo court on some understaffed JAG office.

Oh, by all means that's true. Much of this whole situation is made farcical by placing it in the extreme for dramatic purpose, but as drama goes, it's still a favorite of mine

the entitlement to competent counsel -- ie someone with a basic knowledge of the law -- is a fundamental right,

As someone else said, that's true of a person, which is what is being contested. Whatever the specifics were, the judge initially ruled he was a toaster, based on her legal findings.

Plus, there's the added Star Trek fantasy aspect of Starfleet command officers being highly trained in multitudes of areas, diplomacy, engineering, law, warfare, etc... They're presumably the bloody Rhodes Scholars of the 24th century, & therefore not completely incompetent to be legal counsel, which might be why there is a statute allowing them to perform the function in extreme cases

Now whether this situation was a necessary use of that stipulation is entirely debatable. I would think the judge could have put a stay on the matter until a more proper & formal preceding could be put together. At worst Data might have had to take a leave of absence until the matter was tried fully

Might make a good book, but a really boring tv series.

 

[Alpha Flyer]

Agreed -- whether Data is entitled to fundamental rights (including the right to counsel) is at issue. But saying he's a toaster and therefore doesn't have the right to counsel should have been the first motion filed by Picard (along with the continuance and change of venue one), rather than decide the issue through the merits of the case. Motions is what keep lawyers in cookies (ever watch Law and Order? I squealed with glee when I heard the word "motion" on TV the first time, in that show). Could have made for some just-as-riveting TV ... ;-)

But all that to say, when I watched "The Measure of a Man" the first through seventh time, I suspended all my legal knowledge sky high and went along for an enjoyable ride. Watching Riker angsting alone made it worth while. And THEN I debated the legal shortcomings with my husband. The beauty of being a Trekker -- you can have it both ways.

 

[Use of Time]

Agreed -- whether Data is entitled to fundamental rights (including the right to counsel) is at issue. But saying he's a toaster and therefore doesn't have the right to counsel should have been the first motion filed by Picard (along with the continuance and change of venue one), rather than decide the issue through the merits of the case. Motions is what keep lawyers in cookies (ever watch Law and Order? I squealed with glee when I heard the word "motion" on TV the first time, in that show). Could have made for some just-as-riveting TV ... ;-)

But all that to say, when I watched "The Measure of a Man" the first through seventh time, I suspended all my legal knowledge sky high and went along for an enjoyable ride. Watching Riker angsting alone made it worth while. And THEN I debated the legal shortcomings with my husband. The beauty of being a Trekker -- you can have it both ways.

Agreed, despite the plot holes this episode was executed flawlessly. Patrick and Jon Frakes were great. Stewart really portrayed his situation well. Every time he spoke in the courtroom you could see him carefully and deliberately select his words as if Data's life hung on every one.

 

[Trekker4747]

One thing I found odd on the legal side is that Picard (representing the Defense) is able to call Maddox (the plaintiff) to the stand. Maddox takes the stand and has to be "sworn in", so to speak or at least have his credentials read to the court. So how is Picard able to call to the stand someone whom he has no control over legally and hasn't been called to the stand by his own counsel?

 

[Mojochi]

One thing I found odd on the legal side is that Picard (representing the Defense) is able to call Maddox (the plaintiff) to the stand. Maddox takes the stand and has to be "sworn in", so to speak or at least have his credentials read to the court. So how is Picard able to call to the stand someone whom he has no control over legally and hasn't been called to the stand by his own counsel?

Meh... He was the only available material witness, expert in cybernetics, yadayadayada. It's somewhat far fetched too, but really the least of the legal transgressions, lol

 

[Sci]

My point on Data's role in Starfleet is this: if the issue is his right to resign, then we would need to look at the definition in the Starfleet regulations of "member of Starfleet". If there isn't one that includes a line "must be sentient being", then sentience is not an issue, because the prima facie indicia are all in place -- Academy attendance, length and continuity of service, rank, promotion ... The argument would be that Starfleet cannot have it both ways -- use him like a member, and then claim he isn't one.

I really don't see how that's a flaw in how the Starfleet judicial system is depicted, though. Plenty of institutions have engaged in hypocritical behavior when it comes to sometimes respecting and sometimes denying basic rights to people. Just look at the hypocrisy involved in saying that two gays can't marry but can make other legal arrangements for one-another, or (back in the day) that we were fighting Communism for democracy when blacks couldn't even vote.

As for the lack of delaying motions -- I think it's fair to say that that's a bit unrealistic, but I think you're running up against the fundamental creative conceits of late 1980s U.S. one-hour dramatic television. The episode wanted to be about the issues, not about the legal procedures, and it was written years before the emergence of serialization yielded long-term, multi-episode arcs on U.S. TV. "The Measure of a Man" was written in an era where, aside from two-parters, the central conflict had to be resolved within the episode. So while it's not strictly realistic, I think that's an Acceptable Break from Reality.

Christopher, wouldn't the nature of Data's rights and discrimination in this matter kind of transcend military law and warrant a more formal deliberation.

I'm not sure what you mean by "more formal." Military law and courts-martial are just as formal as the civilian judicial system. They are just as legally binding upon members of the armed forces, and their sentences -- including the death penalty -- can be just as harsh, or worse. Military law is just as real, just as legitimate, and just as formal, as civilian law.

Perhaps you mean to say "more universal," since military law only applies to members of the armed forces?

I wonder if there is an equal opportunity office in Starfleet similar to today's military. That could have been a good stalling tactic used by CAPT Picard to get this hearing moved closer to Earth where he might be able to bring more attention to what was happening. He could have tried to involve the EO office to drag out the matter of whether Data was being discriminated against because he was not an organic officer.

This sounds to me liked it is premised both on the assumption that Data is a legal person rather than property (which is itself in contention), and on the assumption that the Federation Starfleet has a military law or regulation prohibiting it from engaging in discrimination against artificial intelligences. If there is no legal prohibition against discrimination against AIs, then the EOO may have no jurisdiction.

When I say more formal I'm essentially talking about giving Data an actual defense attorney and not have his prosecutor be his first officer. Not to mention that the judge seems to have a contraversial history with his "lawyer" so to speak. This whole thing screams inappropriate to me.

As Christopher has demonstrated, this is simply a facet of the fact that it's a military court, not a civilian court. That which is "inappropriate" in a civilian context is not automatically so in a military context, and that doesn't make it any less "formal."

Edited: And yeah let's take that line that Star just brought up when she says "Data is a toaster."

If I were Data I would be doing everything in my power to get this thing to Earth somehow.

Here is something else I would do If I were Data. I would try to write my "congressman" so to speak and get the story out to the public.

That brings up an interesting question -- of which Federation Member is Data legally a resident? We know that Omicron Theta was considered an "Earth colony" -- presumably that means that Omicron Theta was considered part of United Earth's territory within the Federation, in the same way that Long Island is considered part of the State of New York's territory within the United States. So I'm guessing that Data would be represented on the Federation Council by the Federation Councillor from United Earth. (I have no idea who his United Earth MP would be, though -- assuming that the Parliament of United Earth uses single- or multi-member districts for each MP, that is, rather than electing all MPs on a U.E. "at-large" basis.)

But, that brings up another question:

Has Data ever pursued legal recognition as a United Earth and/or Federation citizen? Has he ever registered to vote? Has he ever applied for or received a Federation passport? If Data has never pursued legal recognition as a citizen from the Federation and United Earth governments, his case may hit another stumbling block.

(I would think that even if Data had not pursued overt recognition of Federation citizenship, though, that would still be his strongest recourse. It seems improbable that Data was issued a "Federation green card" upon being brought to Federation core territory by the U.S.S. Tripoli, so even if he was never issued a United Earth "birth certificate" or equivalent, or was never given a Federation passport or registered to vote, the lack of a "green card" equivalent would, I would argue, constitute an implicit if not overt acknowledgement of Federation citizenship.)

 

[Christopher]

"Data is a toaster!"

Yeah, I'd argue for a change of venue for that line alone to say nothing of the short comings of the "legal staff" there.

I don't think that's fair to Louvois. She wasn't saying that as an expression of her actual belief, but as a rhetorical device:

PHILLIPA: When people of good conscience have an honest dispute, we must still sometimes resort to this kind of adversarial system.
RIKER: You just want me to prove that Data is a mere machine. I can't do that because I don't believe it. I happen to know better. So I'm neither qualified nor willing. You're going to have to find someone else.
PHILLIPA: Then I will rule summarily based upon my findings. Data is a toaster. Have him report to Commander Maddox immediately for experimental refit.
RIKER: I see. I have no choice but to agree.

She was just making the point to Riker that he served Data's interests better by agreeing to serve as prosecutor and allow the hearing to proceed than by refusing and forcing her to rule summarily. She wasn't actually issuing that summary ruling, she was just saying that she would have to if Riker didn't play his part. She put it in those exaggerated terms as hyperbole, to emphasize the point to Riker.

(What surprises me is that they even know what toasters are in the 24th century. Wouldn't they just get toast from a replicator?)

 

[Alpha Flyer]

I think I've said what I want to say about the legal issues, but as to whether they have toasters in the 24th century -- there's one in Tom Paris' and B'Elanna Torres' quarters on Voyager, making Tom's favourite PB&J comfort food in the mornings.

But it doesn't look anything like Data.

 

[Sci]

(What surprises me is that they even know what toasters are in the 24th century. Wouldn't they just get toast from a replicator?)

But food replicators are a fairly recent invention -- so far as we know, they didn't even exist as late as 2293. So they're no more than seventy-one years old as of TNG Season One.

And plenty of episodes have made it clear that replicators are not universally used and universally enjoyed. Plenty of people find replicated food inferior to organic food -- hence the Picard family refusing to purchase a replicator in the mid-24th Century, and hence the continued popularity of restaurants like Sisko's Creole Restaurant in New Orleans.

So I don't think it's at all implausible that they'd still have toasters in 2365.