Why would the Federation have any level of recognition for Klingon political show trials? If that farce had indeed been on the up and up, where was the Federation diplomatic or Starfleet JAG provided lawyers?Kirk and McCoy were convicted of murder; their trial respected in full Klingon jurisdiction and law (both recognized by the federation)
How can you say that? The actual shooters still had not been found at the time, the murder weapons were not in evidence, a Federation/Starfleet legal team never interviewed Klingon witnesses.indeed, when the Federation president said he's not above the law, the proofs of their guilt were not in doubt.
You mean after the show trial? With no legal evidence. Without legal council of the defendants own choosing?As such, the klingon actions of imprisoning 2 high level murderers in the deepest hell-hole they could find were quite justified.
What law? When did the Federation sign a treaty that said that Klingons in Federation space could move prisoners without the Federation authorization across the border into the Empire? The Council would never vote in a piece of foolishness like that.And the Federation president respected both the letter and the spirit of the law when he said he's not above the law.
My position is that the Federation President's first duty is to protect people from Federation Member worlds. That laws from within the Federation do not stand on equal standing with laws from regions outside the Federation. The Federation President doesn't represent people from outside the Federation, but he does the people from within it. Through (presumably) elections, the President was hired by the people of the Federation to manage their needs and protections ... first.On the other hand, T'Girl, your 'all people are equal, but some are more equal than others' view* is quite unenlightened.
The calm and reasonable message I had the President send the Klingon Chancellor was a reminder to her that the Federation was composed of free people, and not disposable political pawns, that Kirk and McCoy's lives were not bargaining pieces.As evidenced by your suggestion of strongarming the klingons in order to de facto treat federation (a stand in for the good old USA) citizens as above the law.
It's unambiguously established in the movie that the Federation did - and does - recognize klingon law; what with the president not being above the law, etc.Why would the Federation have any level of recognition for Klingon political show trials?
Kirk was condemned as captain of the Enterprise, responsible for the actions of his crew (firing on the Kronos 1, then beaming aboard and going on a killing spree).How can you say that? The actual shooters still had not been found at the time, the murder weapons were not in evidence, a Federation/Starfleet legal team never interviewed Klingon witnesses.
You sure like your euphemisms.My position is that the Federation President's first duty is to protect people from Federation Member worlds. That laws from within the Federation do not stand on equal standing with laws from regions outside the Federation. The Federation President doesn't represent people from outside the Federation, but he does the people from within it. Through (presumably) elections, the President was hired by the people of the Federation to manage their needs and protections ... first.
Again with the euphemisms - you would have the Federation threaten the klingons (the substance of the message does not change regardless of the wording) in order to let its people get away with committing crimes.The calm and reasonable message I had the President send the Klingon Chancellor was a reminder to her that the Federation was composed of free people, and not disposable political pawns, that Kirk and McCoy's lives were not bargaining pieces.
This is a continuation of a discussion that was a small part of the "What do you hate about Star Trek?" thread. The thread was recently closed.
In Star Trek The Undiscovered Country, after Kirk and McCoy were taken into the Klingon Empire, the Federation President agreed to not attempt a rescue mission in exchange for the Klingon Chancellor's participation in a political conference.
I feel his decision was in error.
I proposed that the communication between the President and the Chancellor should have gone more like this ...
Chancellor Azetbur: "Mister President, let us come to the point. You want the conference to go forward and so did my father. I will attend in one week, on one condition. We will not extradite the prisoners and you will make no attempt to rescue them in a military operation. We would consider any such attempt an act of war."
President Backbone: "Yes I do want a conference and apparently we both want peace, but madam that peace will not be bought at the price of two men, or even one.
Chancellor Azetbur: "Mister President, what you're doing ..."
President Backbone (calmly): "Is my job and my duty. Madam Chancellor, your home world's atmosphere is heavily contaminated, you lack the means to both fight a major war and save the lives of the majority of your species, we both know this. You require our help, which we won't be in a position to give if we're fighting each other.
If your wish is to die as a people, far be it for me to deign you this ... now then, do you release those two men, or do we come and get them?
Your access to peace and survival, rests in the lives of those men. Or you can have neither
Madam Chancellor, what do you want, and how badly do you want it?"
The thing is, the Federation President couldn't know of Kirk and Bones innocence in the matter. For all he knew, they might have been the people who killed Gorkon.
The thing is, the Federation President couldn't know of Kirk and Bones innocence in the matter. For all he knew, they might have been the people who killed Gorkon.
Presumption of innocence or presumption of guilt?
I'm expected to believe that nobody was even watching Enterprise on their viewscreen and said in their gutteral Klingonese, "... look at that! The torpedo shot out from 15 kalakams underneath, from what appeared to be empty space!" This strains all credibility, except that, perhaps, it could be argued that the Klingons presumed it to have been fired from aft torpedo launchers. Nah ...
Recognized by the klingons sure, but the Pesident actually watched that farce, he saw things that would never have been allowed to pass in a real court of law. Where was the presentation of evidence? We saw that Starfleet uses a "truth detector" in it's procedings, where was it? Why couldn't the defense examine the hull of Kronos One at the point of impact, and by the defense I mean Starfleet experts? Why wasn't starfleet JAG in the courtroom as Kirk and McCoy's defense,Modern day American JAG lawyers travel al around the world to defend Americans interests.Their guilt was established as per recognized klingon jurisdiction/law.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.