The end of Kurn (brainwashing)

Sisko's reaction is pretty true to his to character. Sisko is shown more than once to have very little patience with Klingons. Picard might have been supportive but Sisko has a different way of doing things and I can completely understand why he would be pissed with his most senior Starfleet officer killing his brother, regardless of whether it's allowed culturally or not. It's about setting a standard and expecting his officers to follow that. Personally I think Sisko was right to tell Worf to get his shit together or get the fuck off his station.

Also, killing Gowron was necessary considering he was risking the entire Alpha Quadrant to appease his ego and destroy an honorable man.

 

Technically the term is justified homicide (both words are important, homicide without qualifier is presumed to refer to criminal homicide (or as it's sometimes known cupable homicide), or "lawful killing" (the verdict prefered by the English & Welsh coroner's courts among others.

 

Klingons call it 'politics'

 

Sisko didn't even listen when Dax and Worf were trying to explain what was going on. So he didn't know that it was something Kurn actually wanted. I don't know if it would have made a difference.

Kor

 

I think Sisko was relieved that they found a way not to kill him so he wasn't about to look a gift horse in the mouth.

 

Maybe "extralegal killing" would be closer.

While not identical, legally the closest you'd get modern day is a boxer killing their opponent during a boxing match. Both contestants are engaging in the fight with full consent, and know that they might be disabled or killed. As long as all rules are observed, the "killer" will not face any prosecution. Although there would be a investigation.

 

Sort of.

Your example is fairly applicable, but would be termed the "consent to risk" defence (my source suggests that the US term would be "assumption of risk"), which reduces or removes liability for a criminal act. However, "extralegal killing" (as supposed to self-defence or the defence of others) would be regarded as illegal killing, and while it's possible that the offender might avoid a murder charge, some police officers have been at least disclipined/dismissed for involvement in such cases.

 

Regarding this scene?


He had listened but his role is Commander, not Counselor. There were bigger issues involving the whole of the station's very stability he had to be aware of given his position, nor did he - as commander for the lives on board - allow a ritual killing take place as that would cause unrest or worse amongst every other species on board. It wasn't Worf's station representing Klingon lore that Sisko and Dax were visiting, it was Sisko's station (per treaty) representing Federation lore and the Federation does not allow what Worf wanted to do. Worf was out of line when it gets to a point like premeditated murder. Take a leave and both volunteer without manipulation to go back to Qo'Nos and do it there - problem solved. Worf was able to take a leave in TNG a number of times to do what Picard said wasn't Federation business, so why not on DS9?

Sisko was right.

 

I'd modify the boxer analogy a bit.
In a boxing match, it's entirely possible - even likely - to suffer a serious injury from pounding each other half to death.
In klingon culture; the opponents are fighting to the death; as long as both enter the fight willingly the death of at least one participant is expected and beneficial.

 

No, or at least not to my understanding.

Extralegal mean something which is neither legal nor illegal, it simply isn't covered one way or the other.

Another example of legal dueling where the killer would not be prosecuted is from a century or so ago in America, the "shoot-out," like what would be seen in western films.

 

He's not always willing. When Garak was beaten up by Martok's son, the latter wasn't arrested. Was that to honor Klingon tradition? I wonder.

 

Probably to avoid a diplomatic incident, or something like that.

Kor

 

That reminds me when Martok gets his son's dagger from Worf, he asks "Are you saying that my son is without honor?"
Well, duh! When Martok puts his captain's dagger on Sisko's desk, he lets him know that he's dead. So a Klingon without his dagger is either dead or an honorless petaQ!
Nepotism runs deep among the Martok's.

 

I believe Garak refused to press charges.

The Klingon CO of the ship that harassed Kassidy was executed by Martok for disobeying orders; by disobeying, he forfeit his honor and his life.
When Worf accosted Drex, and he took his D'ktagh, Drex's life was technically forfeit to Worf.
Worf chose to not kill him

 

How do you explain Picard's willingness to honor Klingon tradition and let Worf commit suicide in "Ethics" then, which if anything was much more obviously a situation where Federation policies should have applied?

 

That doesn't matter when it's a criminal act. They obviously knew who had done it so he should have been arrested. The law is meant to protect everyone even people who've been intimidated into not pressing charges.

 

Victims don't press chages (the state does), however they do have the option of not co-operating with the police. Which makes investigation and prosecution very dificult, and often the police will simply drop the matter.

 

But Worf knew that it was Martok's son that had done it so someone must have said something, be it Garak or another witness. That's normally enough to arrest the guy and have at least a probable cause hearing.

 

The "perpetrator gets away because the victim dropped charges" trope happens from time to time in crime/legal dramas, even though real life is not that simple. Legal processes have to be streamlined and dumbed down for the sake of fitting a story into a one-hour broadcasting slot.

Kor

 

You're right. But it makes DS9 look like a lawless slum. Hardly a part of some futuristic utopia!