• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Should Wesley have been kicked out of the Academy?

Having seen the Starfleet Academy show, they allow pretty much anything. Fist fights on campus, escape attempts, assaulting officers and they just go back to class with a little reprimand:lol:

I realise very different shows by very different people in very different (RL as well as in-universe) eras, but... yeah.
 
Having seen the Starfleet Academy show, they allow pretty much anything. Fist fights on campus, escape attempts, assaulting officers and they just go back to class with a little reprimand:lol:

I realise very different shows by very different people in very different (RL as well as in-universe) eras, but... yeah.
Wesley was just ahead of his time.
 
Having seen the Starfleet Academy show, they allow pretty much anything. Fist fights on campus, escape attempts, assaulting officers and they just go back to class with a little reprimand:lol:

I realise very different shows by very different people in very different (RL as well as in-universe) eras, but... yeah.
Just deal with athletic departments at USA universities and you'll see it
 
  • Thank you
Reactions: kkt
Are you sure? :shrug:
Wesley_Crusher%2C_2379.jpg
 
The joke was in reference to when Locarno was on Lower Decks, Rutherford kept insisting Locarno looked like Tom Paris, to which Boimler kept responding "No, I don't see it."

Besides, it should be noted, Owen Paris does keep a picture of Locarno in his office. ;)

Not every child had the same last name as their father.
 
Not every child had the same last name as their father.

In a novel, in passing, B'Elanna contemplates setting Owen Paris up on a blind date with her mum.

To "their" new young siblings Lani and Tom, are going to look a little Game of Thrones.
 
I'm trying to apply the "real life" test. A bunch of Air Force or Naval Aviation cadets try a stupid stunt that's been specifically banned, one of them gets killed, they all try to cover it up. Yes, I have to think expelled at least, probable criminal charges as well. It's noble of Locarno to volunteer to take responsibility and all, but the others really can't escape their own roles in going along with it and saying nothing until it was too late. And the coverup.

Superior pilots demonstrate their superior judgement by avoiding situations in which they must rely on their superior skill.
Court martial and discharge for violating orders and possibly the cover up. But would it actually escalate to murder or manslaughter charges? Would they have to prove Josh caused or didn't cause the "accident" with apparently a massive lack of evidence other than statements by self-serving and likely hostile witnesses (the 4 accused)?

If I'm trying to map it onto real life and someone dies while doing something stupid... say a military cadet dies while drag racing another cadet or cadets out in a desert with no witnesses, and we'll assume such activity is prohibited (no need to check the UCMJ, the scenario could just change to something that is). Did they "get themselves killed" or is the survivor culpable?
 
Court martial and discharge for violating orders and possibly the cover up. But would it actually escalate to murder or manslaughter charges? Would they have to prove Josh caused or didn't cause the "accident" with apparently a massive lack of evidence other than statements by self-serving and likely hostile witnesses (the 4 accused)?

If I'm trying to map it onto real life and someone dies while doing something stupid... say a military cadet dies while drag racing another cadet or cadets out in a desert with no witnesses, and we'll assume such activity is prohibited (no need to check the UCMJ, the scenario could just change to something that is). Did they "get themselves killed" or is the survivor culpable?
I would argue for culpable negligence at the minimum. You are performing a maneuver that is inherently dangerous, forbidden by regulation due to that danger, engage in conspiracy to violate said regulation resulting in a death. You withhold exculpatory evidence from the convening authority to escape responsibility and lie to a superior officer.

At minimum the others show culpability because of their story that the dead cadet showed being unprepared.
 
Picard: "The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth. Whether it's scientific truth, or historical truth, or personal truth. It is the guiding principle upon which Starfleet is based. If you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform. I'm going to make this simple for you, Mister Crusher. Wesley - Wesley are you listening to me?"

Wesley: "Captain I - I ummm ... think I swallowed my combadge."

captain-picard-in-shock.gif


maxresdefault.jpg
 
Court martial and discharge for violating orders and possibly the cover up. But would it actually escalate to murder or manslaughter charges? Would they have to prove Josh caused or didn't cause the "accident" with apparently a massive lack of evidence other than statements by self-serving and likely hostile witnesses (the 4 accused)?

If I'm trying to map it onto real life and someone dies while doing something stupid... say a military cadet dies while drag racing another cadet or cadets out in a desert with no witnesses, and we'll assume such activity is prohibited (no need to check the UCMJ, the scenario could just change to something that is). Did they "get themselves killed" or is the survivor culpable?
Probably murder would be a step too far. Nobody was trying to kill anyone. Perhaps reckless endangerment, which might or might not be brought to trial or conviction, depending on exactly what the case was. I would expect a thorough investigation of exactly what led to attempting the stunt, suspension from the academy during the investigation, and dismissal for attempting the stunt and for the coverup afterwards.
 
Probably murder would be a step too far. Nobody was trying to kill anyone. Perhaps reckless endangerment, which might or might not be brought to trial or conviction, depending on exactly what the case was. I would expect a thorough investigation of exactly what led to attempting the stunt, suspension from the academy during the investigation, and dismissal for attempting the stunt and for the coverup afterwards.
Its called gross negligence.

Doing exactly what you are supposed to do in a shuttle is risking certain death, doing exactly what you are told not to do is courting certain death, and strong arming the weak willed into courting certain death is often, sometimes eventually murder.

I'm calling bullshit.

This kid stared down Jack Bauer.

Wesley told Jack Bauer to "suck his dick" and survived.

I'm thinking that Wes Time godded this First Duty situation, and then after several attempts at re-laying out the game board, this final sad sack turn of events lead the brightest timeline, so young Crusher just weathered it like a boss.
 
Yes, I do think Wesley and the others should have been expelled.

Tom Paris got others killed in an accident and lied about it. He was court martialed and dismissed from Starfleet.

Ro Laren got other officers killed while disobeying orders from that incident before she was brought to the Enterprise. She was court martialed and jailed.


If actual officers get a higher punishment for doing basically the same thing, then cadets most certainly should be getting equal treatment.
 
It's addressed in the episode...

WESLEY: They should've expelled all of us.
PICARD: They very nearly did. Mister Locarno made an impassioned plea for the rest of you. He said that he'd used his influence as squadron leader to convince you to attempt the Kolvoord manoeuvre and then to cover up the truth. He asked to take full responsibility.
Yes, this. I love how many layers there are to make it work from all angles.
It truly was an accident, so no criminal conviction anyway. So Starfleet needs to check THEIR morals, if they'd like to make a difference if someone confesses or not, if they want to expell someone (and therefore make confessions in the future more unlikely).
Also the manoeuvre was "forbidden", but not, like, "criminally" illegal, just Campus rules. And Starfleet is very soft with reckless behaviour if it works out in the end (e.g. Archer stealing that test-ship), so they would have been heroes had the manoeuvre worked.
Also, Geordi found the proof, but Picard leaked it(!) to Wesley in advance. So Wesley lied at first to the investigation, but then technically confessed before proofs were introduced into the process.
Also you'd expect a Starfleet officer to never lie. But they were also still in training, and now under immense personal pressure, so you cannot expect them to behave like perfect senior officers already in all situations.
But also they were all grade A students, so expelling them all, even after confessions, would also look negative for the Academy.

And then it STILL all came down to Locarno's plea confession, not just taking full responsibility, but completely, utterly sacrificing himself, taking all the blame & confessing to probably more pressure and blackmailing the others than he actually did.

Like if any single one of these events went differently, everyone would have been expelled, and rightly so.
But as is, everybody essentially knows what happened, but cannot prove it. So Locarno's confession-version of the events, with him the sole badguy & the rest coming around, in time, and on their own, is the official "result" of the investigation and what the Academy has to base their verdict on.

It's a fantastic episode, how much stuff is in such short 45 minutes. And it's truly "morally gray" behaviour, not black or white.
Truly ridiculously remarkable television.


Also... I'm still salty Nick Locarno wasn't on VOY...
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top