#but even after the verdict of the court that ruled that everything said by this b*tch was a lie

[julielilac]

Umbrella merch by his FC, the famous skirt-pants and Nike shoes 👀

[mariacallous]

This story is part of a joint investigation between Lighthouse Reports and WIRED. To read other stories from the series, click here.

Mitch Daniels is a numbers guy, a cost-cutter. In the early 2000s, he tried and failed to rein in congressional spending under then-US president George W. Bush. So when he took office as Indiana governor in 2005, Daniels was ready to argue once again for fiscal discipline. He wanted to straighten out Indiana’s state government, which he deemed rife with dysfunction. And he started with its welfare system. “That department had been rocked by a series of criminal indictments, with cheats and caseworkers colluding to steal money meant for poor people,” he later said.

Daniels’ solution took the form of a $1.3 billion, 10-year contract with IBM. He had lofty ambitions for the project, which started in 2006, claiming it would improve the benefits service for Indiana residents while cracking down on fraud, ultimately saving taxpayers billions of dollars.

But the contract was a disaster. It was canceled after three years, and IBM and Indiana spent a decade locked in a legal battle about who was to blame. Daniels described IBM’s sweeping redesign and automation of the system—responsible for deciding who was eligible for everything from food stamps to medical cover—as deficient. He was adamant, though, that outsourcing a technical project to a company with expertise was the right call. “It was over-designed,” he said. “Great on paper but too complicated to work in practice.” IBM declined a request for comment. 

In July 2012, Judge David Dryer of the Marion County Superior Court ruled that Indiana had failed to prove IBM had breached its contract. But he also delivered a damning verdict on the system itself, describing it as an untested experiment that replaced caseworkers with computers and phone calls. “Neither party deserves to win this case,” he said. “This story represents a ‘perfect storm’ of misguided government policy and overzealous corporate ambition.” 

That might have been an early death knell for the burgeoning business of welfare state automation. Instead, the industry exploded. Today, such fraud systems form a significant part of the nebulous “govtech” industry, which revolves around companies selling governments new technologies with the promise that new IT will make public administration easier-to-use and more efficient. In 2021, that market was estimated to be worth €116 billion ($120 billion) in Europe and $440 billion globally. And it’s not only companies that expect to profit from this wave of tech. Governments also believe modernizing IT systems can deliver big savings. Back in 2014, the consultancy firm McKinsey estimated that if government digitization reached its “full potential,” it could free up $1 trillion every year. 

Contractors around the world are selling governments on the promise that fraud-hunting algorithms can help them recoup public funds. But researchers who track the spread of these systems argue that these companies are often overpaid and under-supervised. The key issue, researchers say, is accountability. When complex machine learning models or simpler algorithms are developed by the private sector, the computer code that gets to define who is and isn’t accused of fraud is often classed as intellectual property. As a result, the way such systems make decisions is opaque and shielded from interrogation. And even when these algorithmic black holes are embroiled in high-stakes legal battles over alleged bias, the people demanding answers struggle to get them. 

In the UK, a community group called the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People is trying to determine whether a pattern of disabled people being investigated for fraud is linked to government automation projects. In France, the digital rights group La Quadrature du Net has been trying for four months to find out whether a fraud system is discriminating against people born in other countries. And in Serbia, lawyers want to understand why the introduction of a new system has resulted in hundreds of Roma families losing their benefits. “The models are always secret,” says Victoria Adelmant, director of New York University’s digital welfare state project. “If you don’t have transparency, it’s very difficult to even challenge and assess these systems.” 

The rollout of automated bureaucracy has happened quickly and quietly, but it has left a trail of scandals in its wake. In Michigan, a computer system used between 2013 and 2015 falsely accused 34,000 people of welfare fraud. A similar thing happened in Australia between 2015 and 2019, but on a larger scale: The government accused 400,000 people of welfare fraud or error after its social security department started using a so-called robodebt algorithm to automatically issue fines.

Another scandal emerged in the Netherlands in 2019 when tens of thousands of families—many of them from the country’s Ghanaian community—were falsely accused of defrauding the child benefits system. These systems didn’t just contribute to agencies accusing innocent people of welfare fraud; benefits recipients were ordered to repay the money they had supposedly stolen. As a result, many of the accused were left with spiraling debt, destroyed credit ratings, and even bankruptcy. 

Not all government fraud systems linked to scandals were developed with consultancies or technology companies. But civil servants are increasingly turning to the private sector to plug knowledge and personnel gaps. Companies involved in fraud detection systems range from giant consultancies—Accenture, Cap Gemini, PWC—to small tech firms like Totta Data Lab in the Netherlands and Saga in Serbia.

Experts in automation and AI are expensive to hire and less likely to be wooed by public sector salaries. When the UK surveyed its civil servants last year, confidence in the government’s ability to use technology was low, with around half of respondents blaming an inability to hire top talent. More than a third said they had few or no skills in artificial intelligence, machine learning, or automation. But it’s not just industry experience that makes the private sector so alluring to government officials. For welfare departments squeezed by budget cuts, “efficiency” has become a familiar buzzword. “Quite often, a public sector entity will say it is more efficient for us to go and bring in a group of consultants,” says Dan Sheils, head of European public service at Accenture.

The public sector lacks the expertise to create these systems and also to oversee them, says Matthias Spielkamp, cofounder of German nonprofit Algorithm Watch, which has been tracking automated decision-making in social welfare programs across Europe since 2017. In an ideal world, civil servants would be able to develop these systems themselves and have an in-depth understanding of how they work, he says. “That would be a huge difference to working with private companies, because they will sell you black-box systems—black boxes to everyone, including the public sector.” 

In February 2020, a crisis broke out in the Dutch region of Walcheren as officials realized they were in the dark about how their own fraud detection system worked. At the time, a Dutch court had halted the use of another algorithm used to detect welfare fraud, known as SyRI, after finding it violated people’s right to privacy. Officials in Walcheren were not using SyRI, but in emails obtained by Lighthouse Reports and WIRED through freedom-of-information requests, government employees had raised concerns that their algorithm bore striking similarities to the one just condemned by the court.

Walcheren’s system was developed by Totta Data Lab. After signing a contract in March 2017, the Dutch startup developed an algorithm to sort through pseudonymous information, according to details obtained through a freedom-of-information request. The system analyzed details of local people claiming welfare benefits and then sent human investigators a list of those it classified as most likely to be fraudsters. 

The redacted emails show local officials agonizing over whether their algorithm would be dragged into the SyRI scandal. “I don’t think it is possible to explain why our algorithm should be allowed while everyone is reading about SyRI,” one official wrote the week after the court ruling. Another wrote back with similar concerns. “We also do not get insight from Totta Data Lab into what exactly the algorithm does, and we do not have the expertise to check this.” Neither Totta nor officials in Walcheren replied to requests for comment. 

When the Netherlands’ Organization for Applied Scientific Research, an independent research institute, later carried out an audit of a Totta algorithm used in South Holland, the auditors struggled to understand it. “The results of the algorithm do not appear to be reproducible,” their 2021 report reads, referring to attempts to re-create the algorithm’s risk scores. “The risks indicated by the AI algorithm are largely randomly determined,” the researchers found. 

With little transparency, it often takes years—and thousands of victims—to expose technical shortcomings. But a case in Serbia provides a notable exception. In March 2022, a new law came into force which gave the government the green light to use data processing to assess individuals’ financial status and automate parts of its social protection programs. The new socijalna karta, or social card system, would help the government detect fraud while making sure welfare payments were reaching society’s most marginalized, claimed Zoran Đorđević, Serbia’s minister of social affairs in 2020. 

But within months of the system’s introduction, lawyers in the capital Belgrade had started documenting how it was discriminating against the country’s Roma community, an already disenfranchised ethnic minority group. 

Mr. ​​Ahmetović, a welfare recipient who declined to share his first name out of concern that his statement could affect his ability to claim benefits in the future, says he hadn’t heard of the social card system until November 2022, when his wife and four children were turned away from a soup kitchen on the outskirts of the Serbian capital. It wasn’t unusual for the Roma family to be there, as their welfare payments entitled them to a daily meal provided by the government. But on that day, a social worker told them their welfare status had changed and that they would no longer be getting a daily meal.

The family was in shock, and Ahmetović rushed to the nearest welfare office to find out what had happened. He says he was told the new social card system had flagged him after detecting income amounting to 110,000 Serbian dinars ($1,000) in his bank account, which meant he was no longer eligible for a large chunk of the welfare he had been receiving. Ahmetović was confused. He didn’t know anything about this payment. He didn’t even have his own bank account—his wife received the family’s welfare payments into hers. 

With no warning, their welfare payments were slashed by 30 percent, from around 70,000 dinars ($630) per month to 40,000 dinars ($360). The family had been claiming a range of benefits since 2012, including financial social assistance, as their son’s epilepsy and unilateral paralysis means neither parent is able to work. The drop in support meant the Ahmetovićs had to cut back on groceries and couldn’t afford to pay all their bills. Their debt ballooned to over 1 million dinars ($9,000). 

The algorithm’s impact on Serbia’s Roma community has been dramatic. ​​Ahmetović says his sister has also had her welfare payments cut since the system was introduced, as have several of his neighbors. “Almost all people living in Roma settlements in some municipalities lost their benefits,” says Danilo Ćurčić, program coordinator of A11, a Serbian nonprofit that provides legal aid. A11 is trying to help the Ahmetovićs and more than 100 other Roma families reclaim their benefits.

But first, Ćurčić needs to know how the system works. So far, the government has denied his requests to share the source code on intellectual property grounds, claiming it would violate the contract they signed with the company who actually built the system, he says. According to Ćurčić and a government contract, a Serbian company called Saga, which specializes in automation, was involved in building the social card system. Neither Saga nor Serbia’s Ministry of Social Affairs responded to WIRED’s requests for comment.

As the govtech sector has grown, so has the number of companies selling systems to detect fraud. And not all of them are local startups like Saga. Accenture—Ireland’s biggest public company, which employs more than half a million people worldwide—has worked on fraud systems across Europe. In 2017, Accenture helped the Dutch city of Rotterdam develop a system that calculates risk scores for every welfare recipient. A company document describing the original project, obtained by Lighthouse Reports and WIRED, references an Accenture-built machine learning system that combed through data on thousands of people to judge how likely each of them was to commit welfare fraud. “The city could then sort welfare recipients in order of risk of illegitimacy, so that highest risk individuals can be investigated first,” the document says. 

Officials in Rotterdam have said Accenture’s system was used until 2018, when a team at Rotterdam’s Research and Business Intelligence Department took over the algorithm’s development. When Lighthouse Reports and WIRED analyzed a 2021 version of Rotterdam’s fraud algorithm, it became clear that the system discriminates on the basis of race and gender. And around 70 percent of the variables in the 2021 system—information categories such as gender, spoken language, and mental health history that the algorithm used to calculate how likely a person was to commit welfare fraud—appeared to be the same as those in Accenture’s version.

When asked about the similarities, Accenture spokesperson Chinedu Udezue said the company’s “start-up model” was transferred to the city in 2018 when the contract ended. Rotterdam stopped using the algorithm in 2021, after auditors found that the data it used risked creating biased results.

Consultancies generally implement predictive analytics models and then leave after six or eight months, says Sheils, Accenture’s European head of public service. He says his team helps governments avoid what he describes as the industry’s curse: “false positives,” Sheils’ term for life-ruining occurrences of an algorithm incorrectly flagging an innocent person for investigation. “That may seem like a very clinical way of looking at it, but technically speaking, that's all they are.” Sheils claims that Accenture mitigates this by encouraging clients to use AI or machine learning to improve, rather than replace, decision-making humans. “That means ensuring that citizens don’t experience significantly adverse consequences purely on the basis of an AI decision.” 

However, social workers who are asked to investigate people flagged by these systems before making a final decision aren’t necessarily exercising independent judgment, says Eva Blum-Dumontet, a tech policy consultant who researched algorithms in the UK welfare system for campaign group Privacy International. “This human is still going to be influenced by the decision of the AI,” she says. “Having a human in the loop doesn’t mean that the human has the time, the training, or the capacity to question the decision.” 

Despite the scandals and repeated allegations of bias, the industry building these systems shows no sign of slowing. And neither does government appetite for buying or building such systems. Last summer, Italy’s Ministry of Economy and Finance adopted a decree authorizing the launch of an algorithm that searches for discrepancies in tax filings, earnings, property records, and bank accounts to identify people at risk of not paying their taxes. 

But as more governments adopt these systems, the number of people erroneously flagged for fraud is growing. And once someone is caught up in the tangle of data, it can take years to break free. In the Netherlands’ child benefits scandal, people lost their cars and homes, and couples described how the stress drove them to divorce. “The financial misery is huge,” says Orlando Kadir, a lawyer representing more than 1,000 affected families. After a public inquiry, the Dutch government agreed in 2020 to pay the families around €30,000 ($32,000) in compensation. But debt balloons over time. And that amount is not enough, says Kadir, who claims some families are now €250,000 in debt. 

In Belgrade, ​​Ahmetović is still fighting to get his family’s full benefits reinstated. “I don’t understand what happened or why,” he says. “It’s hard to compete against the computer and prove this was a mistake.” But he says he’s also wondering whether he’ll ever be compensated for the financial damage the social card system has caused him. He’s yet another person caught up in an opaque system whose inner workings are guarded by the companies and governments who make and operate them. Ćurčić, though, is clear on what needs to change. “We don’t care who made the algorithm,” he says. “The algorithm just has to be made public.”

Additional reporting by Gabriel Geiger and Justin-Casimir Braun.

[meganechan05]

Judge and Bailiff - Chapter 4

Because AO3 is down, imma have to post this brand new chapter here so ENJOY! (￣▽￣;)

Edit: it's back up lmao

Don't worry. It's fluffy and cute and very much RitaMoru being an old married couple.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Rita groggily woke up, only to find themself in their bedroom. They tried to push themself up, feeling their arms grow weaker with each movement as their vision was still blurry from suddenly collapsing outside the courtroom. A pair of hands quickly grabbed their shoulders, making them turn to find Morfonia.

"Morfonia...?" They began to cough, their voice hoarse and their throat extremely parched.

"Don't push yourself. The physician said you have a high fever." She helped her King sit against the backrest. She then handed Rita a mug of warm tea. "Here."

They took careful sips, allowing the warm tea to soothe the pain. They let out a small sigh, only to shiver when the warmth quickly faded. Morfonia quickly moved to put the mug back onto the nightstand so she can tuck Rita in, only for the Judge to fight it.

"I'm fine."

"You're not. You have a dangerously high fever, passed out in the middle of the castle, and can barely keep yourself up. Even Himeno said to keep you in bed when she called."

"She called?"

"Something about patents and using Gokkan's tunnels to Bugnarok to make deliveries. I already handled it." She waved her hand as if to wave it off as something they shouldn't worry about.

Rita looked at their retainer, perplexed and also surprised to hear her taking action. Morfonia noticed and looked away.

"She said it was urgent and you're in no shape to do anything so I used my right as your successor to take charge. Nothing wrong with that, right? You always told me to in case anything happened."

The Judge could only look towards the ceiling at this, knowing she's right. They did always have backup plans written out in case of emergencies. Moreso after the first Bugnarok attack as they weren't sure what could happen when the Kings were fighting. They were just taken aback since Morfonia had a tendency to avoid work as much as possible.

"The trials?"

"You already finished investigations and wrote down your verdict so it's more of confirming it in court. Why? You wanna postpone?"

"Postponements would only keep those possibly innocent in prison longer than they should." They began to get up again. "I'll just give my ruling and-" They were pushed back into bed by their retainer.

"I'll handle it. And if you keep moving around trying to work while resting, it will only keep you sick longer which means more work for me to do. So stay in bed."

"It's fine-"

"It is not. Don't make me cuff you to your bed, Rita."

Rita glared at their retainer, only to lay down with a small huff. If there was anything on the list of pros for Morfonia, it would be that she tends to keep her word. But sometimes it could be a con in Rita's book for situations like this.

Morfonia pulled the blanket up to cover her King. "Just rest. The more you rest, the faster you can get back to work." She grabbed Rita's Caliber and Hotline before leaving, knowing the Judge would grab them at any moment.

Curse her.

~~

"Hm? Rita-san's out sick?" Gira asked as he was reading over paperwork.

"According to Morfonia-sama, they've caught a cold so she will be taking care of everything."

"Do all attendants do that?"

"It often depends per country. Had you not become a traitor against your brother, you would have been his temporary replacement should he have fallen ill since you were next in line for the throne. Not only is she Rita-sama's retainer, Morfonia-sama is also the successor to Gokkan's throne."

"I didn't know that. Then I guess I shouldn't cause problems for them. Knowing Rita-san, they're probably stressed from not being able to work."

"A decision to strengthen relationship between Shugoddom and Gokkan?"

"Something like that. I do owe them for when everyone faked my death." He checked off the list in front of him before signing papers. "I just hope Morfonia-san will be okay with that."

~~

Morfonia stretched after leaving the courtroom, having finished all of the trials for the day. "Mou... I don't know how Rita can handle rowdy prisoners like that..." she whined, recoiling from the nasty comments thrown from guilty prisoners.

Not her fault they've committed crimes with evidence to prove it. Rita already had the paperwork documenting everything as well as audio recordings when investigating. No one could really fault her for her King's decisions.

"Sounds like you have it rough."

She turned to find Himeno. "Ah. What brings you here?"

"To check on Rita, of course. While your physicians are adequate, the least I could do is do a check, myself, to make sure a fellow King is okay."

Morfonia backed away, glaring at the Queen in suspicion. "Nothing else?"

"Why would there be anything else?" Himeno fluttered her lashes in innocence.

"Knowing you, there could always be something."

Himeno furrowed her brows at the accusation. "If you're referring to my selfishness, you do know it goes both ways, right? If Rita's healthy, they're the only one I can trust to give fair rulings to people. A change in power is too tedious even with Gokkan's Neutrality. So. Where are they?"

Morfonia eyed the woman before sighing. "If they get angry, that's on you."

She led her to Rita's quarters where the Judge was still asleep, a plush Moffun wearing a face mask in their arms. Himeno then noticed what looked like a handcuff connected to the bed post at the footrest.

She turned to Morfonia. "And that?"

"Ah. I caught them trying to get out of bed between trials. I did warn Rita I'd cuff them to bed if they tried to get out and work."

Himeno tried to hold back a laugh at this. Of course they would. She took off her backpack holding her medical supplies before going to work. Checking Rita's temperature and breathing pattern.

"Rare to have them fall sick."

"Scared the Shugods out of everyone," Morfonia said, folding her arms. "Injuries from battles or tough cases, we can expect, but not a cold."

"Even more surprising since they can walk outside in those clothes. Don't they know it's freezing out?" She put away her equipment. "Have they've taken any medication yet?"

Morfonia hesitated. "They didn't want to."

Himeno rolled her eyes at this. "This stubborn idiot." She shuffled through her bag, taking out a box and what looked like jelly packets. She handed them to Morfonia. "Good thing I packed these if they're going to be stubborn. Just give them one packet of the medicine. If they get fussy about it, bribe them with the jelly."

Morfonia looked at the packets. "These are safe for them to eat while sick?"

"Common practice in Ishabana when a child refuses to take their medicine. Guessing since Rita rarely gets sick, no one would figure out the Chief Justice hates medicine."

"Just don't tell the other Kings," Morfonia said with a pout. "Imagine how angry they'd get if they found out you know about that."

"Whatever you say. But it looks like you have everything handled. Just keep me updated as they get more rest, okay?"

"Sure."

The Queen of Ishabana took her leave, only for Morfonia to sigh. "To think the others would be that worried." She couldn't help but to smile as she set everything onto the nightstand. "But it means Rita's being friendly with them."

"I'm not."

She nearly jumped out of her chair when she heard Rita's voice, turning to her King to find them awake. "R-Rita?! How long were you awake?!" She exclaimed as the judge sat up.

"Somewhere along the lines of being called stubborn." This only made them cough, their voice still hoarse.

Morfonia gave them their cup of water. "Then you heard everything about the medicine?"

Rita quickly turned away at the question, not wanting to look at Morfonia in the eye.

"Rita. It would be a pain if you don't take it. And no screaming or it'll make your throat worse." She heard Rita click their tongue in annoyance. "At least take it so Himeno's visit wouldn't be for nothing. Even bringing you a jelly drink since you're so picky." She waited until Rita held out their free hand, allowing her to place the packet onto their palm.

She watched as Rita slowly opened up one end before staring at the packet. Shugods, she wanted to record this moment to laugh at later.

Imagine the Immovable King being afraid of taking their medicine.

Rita quickly poured the contents into the mouth before drinking the water, their face scrunched up. They heard Morfonia hold back a laugh which prompted them to glare at her. But the two knew each other long enough that said glares don't really mean anything.

"Good judge~ You took your medicine~" Morfonia teased, handing their King the opened jelly packet.

"Speak none of this to anyone," they mustered out before taking a sip.

"Whatever you say~"

[eternal-echoes]

Hello! I came across that St. Thomas Aquinas quote you posted about needing to confess to sins one is unsure are mortal or not and am confused. I suffer greatly from scrupulosity and resources for dealing with it have always instructed that if you're unsure if something is a mortal sin or not, assume it is not and let your anxious mind be at peace about it and to avoid confessing to these things. The 10 Commandments for the Scrupulous (a wonderful resource for me) advises "Only confess to sins that are clear and certain," not ones that you doubt are sins or not. It's been a piece of advice that's helped me greatly over the years and I'm constantly having those moments of: "Was that a mortal sin??" but am able to let the worry go by reminding myself of the resources I've read.

Is it simply that there are different rules for the scrupulous and people without it should confess to doubtful sins while those with religious OCD should not? As you may imagine, this conflicting advice has me anxious now.

“When a man doubts whether a certain sin be mortal, he is bound to confess it, so long as he remains in doubt, because he sins mortally by committing or omitting anything, while doubting of its being a mortal sin, and thus leaving the matter to chance; and, moreoever, he courts danger, if he neglect to confess that which he doubts may be a mortal sin. He should not, however, affirm that it was a mortal sin, but speak doubtfully, leaving the verdict to the priest, whose business it is to discern between what is leprosy and what is not.”

- St. Thomas Aquinas (St, Supplement, Q.6 A.4 Reply Obj. 3)

—

Hi Anon, I was honestly worried when I reread it again after being posted that it would stir someone’s scrupulosity.

The best explanation I can come up with it is:

It is possible that someone can commit a mortal sin but because that person had no knowledge that it is a mortal sin due to invincible ignorance so the culpability is lessened in that regard (i.e. being born in the wrong religion and having died with no access to Catholicism). If that person has led a morally virtuous life to the best of his knowledge and ability, he could be in Heaven.

So with that in mind, committing sin may not have the effect of a mortal sin on the soul even if it is mortal because the agent’s knowledge was impaired and therefore was not acting with full knowledge that it was a mortal sin.

I think this is one of those things that doesn’t apply in every case so each one has to be judge on its own. I believe abortion would be judged differently if one has been misled to believe that a fetusl isn’t human.

I think what St. Thomas Aquinas is saying that for everything we’ve done that we’re not sure of, we should let the priest know so he can guide us to see if it is a mortal sin or venial sin. (One time I wasn’t sure if watching TV shows from pirated websites is a mortal or venial sin and when I confessed it the priest said it was venial.)

I’m gonna tag @fr-perry @coruscanttojerusalem

for a more detailed explanation because I feel like I have missed something I probably should have done more research before answering but I know you sent this to me yesterday and I didn’t wanna keep you waiting. If I had said anything wrong here, I’m hoping that Cunningham’s law saves us here.

[olokosomolo]

How everything starts to emerge Above the surface, is simply unimaginable. Now I understand why Ricky refused my offer to team up and create an amazing glorious business. He knew in advance that it would not work even though the business would have been successful by global standards. He knew that under the surface they were hiding so many criminal acts committed against me during the past years and what I had already managed to discover still does not reach the tip of the iceberg. So here is another terrible thing I discovered recently. This is without a doubt the hardest thing since the affair broke. And who knows what kind of engraving I received on my already etched and wrinkled face it seems that in the last year, I have aged 70 years from most of all the beatings I receive when discovering the actions of the whole family against me. This time the discovery could not have been closer than that my eldest son was the closest source of this blood plot and even participated in it as an active soldier. I’m writing to you and my hand is shaking it is like my brain wishes my hand to write faster and my hand can’t do that so I making a mess and now it’s even slower since I need to go back and fix writing errors. Today I had a hard conversation with my dad, when in the middle of the conversation he said: you know few months before you flew back to the USA your son told me, grandpa, if dad I’ll comes back to the USA, he will lose everything He got. What? I become confused what do you mean by that dad? Why didn’t you tell me such a thing??? What the hell is going on? Now it came to be that my children were also involved in the core of the plot and even participate in some secret operations against me. So I then retrieve from my file all of the texts and phone conversations we had together and what I saw was worst than the gate of hell. It started way before the main event on October 2017. It started when he was 16 years old ( perhaps his mom and cousin were leading him to do so. And one weekend I used to take him and his brother to stay with me I used to encounter big problems with the condo tower management and a few neighbors each time he came to stay for the weekend and I as a good father always protected him unconditionally. Until the summer of 2016 when he came all crying that someone throw his soccer ball into the river. And I’m like a good father got down to have some talks with whom is responsible for this hideous act. I didn’t know that he kick the soccer ball into the sunbathing crowd that packed the deck in front of the river in which the pool and spa of the condo were located. Who the hell play with soccer balls when the deck is packed with people that came down to the big deck to enjoy the sun on a hot summer weekend? When I came the guy saw me coming over. He immediately stood up from his beach bed and approached me and almost hit me. I managed to avoid it and he quickly return to his seat, and showed me a middle finger. A friend of mine that came with me downstairs saw that one of the people that suntan, started recording the event with her smartphone, and told his son to approach her and record her too. Then his son rides my yellow scooter towards her and the idiot pulls his phone and begins to record her when his phone is less than a foot distance from her face. She then jump stood up while the boy barely escape leaving behind my yellow scooter. She then pulls my scooter up look to the right, then left, walk to the decked balcony, and throw my scooter to the Delaware River. That was overwhelming 😳 first the soccer ball now the scooter, what next then? I complain to the management and I got the money back but soon after a got a lawsuit for $ 30k against me and right when the big plot of my family just started to emerge and surface, I got so disturbed that I forgot to appear in court that dealt with the lawsuit. The judge ruled a harsh verdict against me that cost me more than $36k.

NEVERTHELESS, I always care about him and when he reached the age of 18 years old he received from a saving bond I saved for his college the amount of $64k. It was in 2019 that he received this amazing gift from me. And also two years after the event started in which he was 100% aware of the plot against me by his mom and cousins yet not to tell me a thing, but to approach my dad ( his grandpa) to whisper such a horrible planned prediction about their plan executed if I dare to be back in the USA. In addition to this, I mentioned not long ago that when he arrived for the 2019 visit, I gave him the email and password to Gaia TV and he immediately forwarded the information to his mother, who broke into one of my Google accounts so she could follow every step I took to locate me everywhere I went. I have found out recently after my conversation with Google which notified me about an issue with this account. Unbelievable how I trusted unconditionally a first-degree traitor. Well, there is the 2500$ I gave him to buy me a camera that he never bought but kept the money. And then ignored all my texts emails and voice messages until today when my father told me that in 2019 he warned my dad that if I’ll ever come back to the USA I’m going to lose it all. The hypocritical mf knew it all and play the nice son hug and kiss and then kisshh me under the bus. Wow, what kind of horror movie do I sign in to be the main abuse character.

[offender42085]

Post 0201

Shane Miller, West Virginia inmate 3557581, born 1993, incarceration intake in 2016 at age 22, Sentenced to life with possibility of parole; next parole hearing scheduled 12/17/2036

Robbery, Conspiracy to commit Murder, Battery

A nab charged with beating a drowning a man in a mining pond in 2014 was found guilty.

After over an hour of deliberation, the jury sided with the state’s argument that the physical evidence corroborated with witness testimony that Shane Andrew Miller, 22, of Lumberport, murdered Darrel Lynn Golden, 57, of Clarksburg, to prevent him from talking to authorities.

A guilty verdict was returned by the jury for Murder in the First Degree –with a finding for mercy– and also for Conspiracy to Commit Murder.

Meredith Chambers, a forensics expert with the State Police crime lab, told walked the court through the result of testing conducted on multiple pieces of evidence, including clothes found near the crime scene that Miller threw out of his vehicle while driving away.

The takeaway that the Assistant Prosecutor told the jury to focus on was Golden’s DNA found on Miller’s sweatshirt and hat.

Dr. Jimmie Smith, with the state Medical Examiner’s Office was called to the stand for questioning related to the autopsy conducted on Golden.

He told the court his determination that the manner death was homicide by physical assault including asphyxiation.

The signs of blunt force trauma found on the right side of the victim’s head and 510 mL of “light brown watery fluid” found in the stomach and lungs lined up with the states assertion that Miller hit Golden on the side of the head, dragged his body into the pond and held him under water until he was dead.

The Defense attorney attempted to use the state’s last witness to cast doubt on another key witness, Miller’s ex-wife Tracy Boals.

She testified that Miller choked Golden before having to drag him into the water, but Smith reported that there were no signs of strangulation around the neck. However, he did not entirely rule out the possibility.

After the state rested it’s case, the defense called only one witness in a bid to prove Miller’s innocence, Miller himself, who claimed it was “up to him to tell the truth” because everyone else had lied.

His account of March 16, 2014 was different than that presented by state witnesses, saying that his at-the-time fiance Boals woke him up at their home because she “had gotten herself into a mess.”

Boals had driven into Clarksburg by herself when Golden recognized Miller’s car and flagged her down in hopes that she would give him a ride to sell some pain pills, he testified

When Golden wouldn’t give Boals any pills, she knocked him unconscious, according to Miller’s testimony.

It was then she got Miller, brought him to the pond and he put the body in the water face down and they drove off.

On cross examination, the state worked to pick his testimony apart, asking why no pill bottle had been found on Golden –or anywhere else– and why did he put the body in the water without knowing if his friend was dead or without calling authorities.

In closing arguments, the defense asked the jury to consider what could have been considered inconsistencies in testimony. Jones keyed in particularly on Boals saying the murder occurred while the sun was up, but here timeline of events would have brought everything to a close well after sundown.

The state countered that the physical evidence backed everything up, and even if Boals wasn’t the most reliable witness, Miller had told his older brother what had happened.

Cook remind the jury of what she said during opening statements that Miller “killed his good friend to stay out of prison. The evidence, she stated, backed up their premise that Miller feared Golden would tell authorities about break in at the Bluebird in Clarksburg, which would result in his probation being revoked.

2f

[gdsplay]

OT5 VIPS are so embarrassing to the fandom and just humanity in general, they’ll bend over backwards to defend their ‘panda’ it physically hurts me :( half of the proof they give isn’t substantial they don’t take in account that they only have some of the evidence in seungri cases and Hes not only being charged of things like prostitution but embezzlement and other things— seungri stans are so desperate to prove he didn’t have anything to do with harming those women they don’t stop to think of the harm he’s done in other ways. Even if the judge is wrong about the prostitution, and he truly never saw any sex vid in those gcs hes still done bad illegal harmful stuff? He’s not a good person no matter how much they try to spin this. My only qualm with the ruling is that he got more time than the others— everyone’s sentence shoudlve been way longer

They’re just like Seungri himself. Narcissistic, cocky, loud and obnoxious. Why wonder they decided to continue and support him. They’re the same type of person all fused into one.

The second hand embarrassment I have for them right now with the guilty final verdict and prison sentence, they’re the biggest joke right now.

While, I’m aware that a guilty verdict was never going to change their opinions and stance, it’s nice to see them be proven wrong after we’ve all tried to tell them since the beginning. They don’t want to listen and insist that Seungri was being used as a ‘witch-hunt’ it’s refreshing to watch them be put in their place.

Seungri did see sex videos, he laughed at them, he thought it was so humorous. The chats were fabricated they kept whining.. they all weren’t all ‘fake’ and their was screenshots of Seungri in the chats, he was in multiple. It wasn’t only Lee Jonghyun that they keep intending that’s who it only was; Seungri even had the nerve to say: ‘My life is more than Jung Joonyoung’s kakao chats’

the audacity!!

For these fans to continue and preach that a 30-year old man who has always been known to be a pervert and woman-chaser, he has no clue or knowledge on any of this is still by the far the dumbest thing I’ve heard them say. Seungri loves sex, he knew everything. That was his business, he’s passionate about sex where he had to go into that business just to make more money since I guess he wasn’t making enough being the least liked in BigBang. Suddenly every vip is now he’s biggest fan, sounds like both ends are guilty and pitiful. It took a whole prostitution scandal for these fans to make him #1. He’s thriving off of it but in the worse way.

Seungri knew what Jung Joonyoung was like, it wasn’t something these men hid behind his back. They all got along for a reason, right? Right. Just because Seungri himself didn’t assault or r*pe anyone that doesn’t make him a hero, that out of all things doesn’t make him any ounce of innocent left in him. He doesn’t get an award and a pat on his back for not partaking in abuse. Seungri’s partner in crime Yoo Insuk knew everything. Even admitted to it. Seungri worked with him. He’s in on it. Seungri doesn’t care about anyone but himself and it’s been that way for ages. He’s always shown that side of his.

These fans have the audacity to bitch and moan that these news articles are putting nothing but misleading information as if they are not doing the same thing? They have been telling everyone who will listen that Seungri was proven innocent. They do on and make their own threads but continue to edit and tamper what they want you to know. No gambling is NOT his only charge and this whole case is not based off of gambling I hate to break to you. You don’t get to pick and choose what to ignore and what to list just to benefit some scum idol you thought was someone you could love forever. A fandom does not make that decision. None of these fans know Seungri, none of them were in any of the court hearings. They know as much as you and I do: what Seungri wants to show us. Nothing was ever sincere and trustable with him and I hate to admit that now. I never felt I could trust him like I can with the others, my internal gut feelings were right all along.

The constant preach of Seungri’s innocent just to be slapped in the face today with an actual final verdict, they’ll be raging on twitter coming up with an ‘unfair case’ and that he is ‘wrongfully’ accused, you watch. Like I said before; a guilty verdict will not stop them even if that’s what some of us thought. It will not. Maybe it’ll hit some of them in the head but I don’t see them changing their stance or opinions. As you said yourself, Seungri had enough time, too much time I’d you ask me. Three years is nothing, the other have about 5 years. Korea’s justice system is a mess. Justice is never served just temporarily served, like putting a bandaid over a serve wound.

Who are you going to believe a court order or a biased fandom of an Ex idol. Seriously they thought as a fandom they could get everyone to follow them like a cult to save their leader. They’re criminally insane!

This fandom is the biggest joke of the century this is why nobody even tries to bother and get into BigBang neither take the fandom seriously.

[waragainstyourfaith]

Thank you to @broughtmeyourlove for listening to the beginnings of this (aka when I first got my thoughts down) and thank you to me for saying all this in the shower but most importantly thank you @hannibalhadalittlelamb whose art got me to finally think deeper about the nature of Hannibal’s trial. Let’s begin.

Hannibal’s trial isn’t something I usually see discussed within the fandom space. And why would it be? We know the final verdict and we know that besides that everything works out in the end anyway. It’s an afterthought. So who would care? That’s like reading the first few chapters of a book to skip to the final one. Characters change and so does the story as a whole.

On @/hannibalhadalittlelamb’s post (here), their tags read that their depiction of Hannibal is leaning into OOC (out of character) territory. I disagree.

During Hannibal’s trial, we have to think about how it would have gone down. Actually. There was no possible way for Will to miss or be exempt from this trial. His coworkers and boss knew his strong relation to Hannibal and how their professional relationship had definitely, at some point or another, turned personal. The mutual attempts of murder had not been lost on anyone, but, of course, that made Will all the more personal a witness.

However, Will wants nothing to do with Hannibal.

I understand there is a popular theory going around that Will and Hannibal were in a sort of understanding during the trial, but, honestly? We see Will desperately wanting to remain kept away from Hannibal, to live a normal life with a wife and son. Hannibal throws a wrench into this whole ordeal and this trial, after what conspired between them overseas, leaves Will in the headspace and with the opportunity to quite literally never see Hannibal again in his life.

And after everything and with what Will thinks he wants, how could he deny that? Helping Hannibal rule into the insanity plea was not an act of mercy but an act of protection. Will more than anyone knows Hannibal should be kept under 24/7 surveillance and away from every person he could ever harm. Being ruled out of given the death penalty was the underlying bonus his conscience wouldn’t let him think too deeply about.

In court, you are sworn in on the bible, on God, to tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth [...] So help you God.”. Both Will and Hannibal were undoubtedly sworn in, but considering the argument Hannibal’s legal team was using, would you trust a man under the insanity plea or his victim who is an FBI agent more? Right.

So, Will is given free rein in this courtroom to spin the story of him and Hannibal whichever way he pleases. Seeing what I mentioned before, Will is going to remove himself as far away from Hannibal as he can while still being able to confidentially and securely reveal everything without getting his hands dirty nor embarrassing himself. Hannibal does not get this luxury.

Hannibal is a man of his privacy. As many analyses have written and as many real psychologists have said while dissecting the headspace of Hannibal, his need to eat people is his need to control. The trauma Hannibal went through with Mischa, whether you know the depth of it or just the surface, is enough context to explain what happens next. Hannibal eats them. Attitude is Hannibal’s one basis of morals and consensus. “One should always eat the rude”.

To determine their fate and to consume them is him “playing God”, but at its core, it is Hannibal needing to be in control. We see the severity of his true, underlying, desperation come to light at a first glimpse with the gruesome death of Beverly Katz. Undoubtedly, this is one of his most haunting scenes and we see the insides(dissection) of Beverly as she had attempted to find in Hannibal by going through his home. By sneaking a glance under the person suit. His inner monster comes out in a rage during this murder. He is private and anything that anyone knows about Hannibal is what he has allowed them to live to be able to say so. Look at Will’s position once more.

What no one seems to realize is that, during this trial, Hannibal is not in control. Will is the spinster of their life, a life Hannibal used his truest of colors to paint, and ultimately watched it becomes torn to shreds in front of him. Remember, Will is sworn in during this trial. This does not necessarily mean he is telling the truth, but it means everyone thinks he is. It’s a play of tragedy and Hannibal and Will are the two lead star-crossed lovers.

The entirely of Hannibal and the world he has handed to Will on a sparkling platter is being dissected and shown to everyone. The story of the Chesapeake Ripper was undoubtedly massive. A criminal having not been caught for years that everyone seemed to know nothing about revealed to be one of the closest, inside links with the FBI themselves? Tale of the decade.

The spotlight is on Hannibal, but he is being puppeteered by Will without a say in it for himself.

Hannibal cracks as he’s poked and prodded and bare for the media to do as they like and Will sits by and says what he likes. Here is where we would see a sliver of what lays beneath their person suits. Hannibal’s impulsivity and monstrousness under his charming exterior and Will’s manipulative, isolatedness under his empathetic cloak.

We look at Hannibal. He would be torn to shreds from this. The porcelain pot that contains his beast has broken and shattered by the swatting hand of Will, someone he trusted and loved. The intruding eyes of the jury stay on him as he is diagnosed as insane while he considers himself to be in the best possible headspace he ever could be. Everything he told Will and what he considered truth from Will’s mouth was dismissed and disputed under oath.

Hannibal is embarrassed. People call him insane and lock him away at dig through his mind and his things without his permission with protruding needles and telescopes. Hannibal has to play nice to simply be allowed a working toilet and the books that he has collected himself. Anything and everything he writes and draws that he wants to send out is dissected and analyzed. He has no privacy. He is not allowed a toe out of line.

Looking back at Hannibal from season one, episode seven is a good one to compare from, and when we see him first after year years in isolation, we see plain as day these are not the same men. In season one, Hannibal is handsome and cunning enough so that he wiggles his way into the deepest, most protected parts of the FBI as one of the highest-ranked killers on their watch list. He is polite enough to even invite them to dinner and feed them the organs of his victims.

He’s slick and intelligent and Hannibal is the idea of a lifetime.

And then we come to the second half of season three.

Hannibal, at this point, has been isolated for three years and has been under painful scrutiny even longer. During this time, he’s had all the space he could get to rebuild the person suit, but the pieces won’t fit. It’s jaggedly put together and no matter how long he spends trying to perfect its construction to what it used to be, it isn’t what it used to be. Will had done that to him. Will had effectively broken Hannibal.

I see often the running gag that season three is immensely funnier and leaning much more into the comedy aspect of Hannibal during his interactions with Will and Alana and even jack to an extent. But this is not him being funny; this is Hannibal pushing limits.

Looking back to paragraph eleven [“To determine their fate and consume them…”] we come back to Hannibal’s need to control. Remember, in this space, Hannibal is shoved into line. He’s snappy and cynical here. This is Hannibal exercising his limits and testing patience. His acting out and making snide comments is nothing he can be punished for, but it clearly agitates them. Hannibal teeters just enough on the edge of annoyance so that his jabs still hit, but his privileges still remain.

This is his monster leaking through the cracks. Hannibal is desperate. He is grasping for a hold over these people he had looked down upon from his throne in the sky as God for so long. He is rude. This is both his shield and deception. It leaves Hannibal with the idea that he is effectively feeding them out of his hand, that he has them right where he wants them. When Hannibal does this, it is his last line of defense to keep himself from blowing up. Ruining it all.

Season three is not season one. He is gasping and hurt and that is what makes the Dolarhyde kill all the more powerful. The whiplash and bounce back with his and Will’s relationship is powerful and dangerous.

Will watching Hannibal with his dead stare, person suit thrown off the moment he decided to go with Hannibal into that car, as he is shot is groundbreaking. Hannibal can see Will. they have effectively switched positions. As though he were God, Will looks down on Hannibal’s suffering. When Will decides to fight Dolarhyde in retaliation,  this is the point it all cuts lose.

At that moment, Will has freed the beast. Hannibal has finally someone to take the reins of his monster whom he trusts. Because Hannibal never blamed Will, even during that time in his isolation, he was waiting. Waiting for Will because despite the betrayal and despite the hurt he loved him. All that time he loved him.

The Dolarhyde kill is the messiest one of the show, which makes it all the more powerful. Hannibal has--I don’t want to say “lost composure”--but he definitely has dropped the act of his togetherness. In this, Hannibal is free. So long he has spent trying to hold himself together, to fool those around him and take care of everyone and himself. 

It’s a common misconception that a person in a position of power, such as a CEO, would want to be in this position all of the time. In fact, it’s been shown that the human mind needs a healthy balance. A person who is pushed around on a day-to-day basis and has no control over their life would most likely enjoy having control over a person and vice versa.

God must be tired. Hannibal was. Wearing his person suit for years and years, with only a dangerous outlet to relieve the built-up tension of his monster. To place the control into Will’s hands is inevitable and the best relief for both of them. Hannibal in killing and Will in power.

In that final scene, Hannibal has surrendered control to Will while barring the entirety of what lay within and Will has a high enough apathy for this to no longer have any hold over him. They have switched their roles. Now, Will is the one pulling the strings and Hannibal is the one letting himself be maneuvered.

This trial was the turn of the tables. It was the biggest part of their character and the biggest foreshadowing for the finale.

In Florence, Hannibal has the hold over Will. In season two, Will has the hold over Hannibal. In season one, Hannibal has the hold over Will. This trial that has been left out was the missing piece to even their stance and to level their playing field, making it easiest for the two to blur.

The trial is effectively and consequently one of if not the most important scene that was missing from the show.

[captaincartervalues]

This is everything wrong with that trial bc it IRKS me to no end:

There is absolutely ZERO instances in which Lex would have gotten his trial that quickly. From the time he was arrested last episode (aka yesterday in their timeline) to arraignment would most likely take two to three days. For those who don’t know, an arraignment is where the government formally presents the charges to the defendant in court and the defendant consequently enters their plea, either guilty or not guilty. After the arraignment is the trial, which by law and procedure would never occur immediately after or within the same day. Logistically, scheduling a trial to find days where all parties (judge, defendant, and prosecutor) are available requires time and coordination. Courts’ calendars are booked weeks and months ahead of time. Per the 6th Amendment in the US Constitution, a defendant is entitled to a speedy trial. However a speedy trial never means a trial within a DAY. Though there’s often no set number of days that would automatically constitute a violation of a speedy trial, generally defendants should see their trial start date within approximately 60 days. That is because of the real world logistic constraints but it is also to ensure that BOTH the prosecution and defense have adequate time to prepare for a trial. This preparation includes gathering and disclosing evidence, witness prep, motion filing, and just generally getting your case together. However that 60 days is only if the defense doesn’t waive their right to a speedy trial which many do in order to properly prepare and mount a defense to acquit. Trials in these cases can and do get pushed several months or even upwards of years til the start date. Assuming Lex refused to waive his 6th amendment right and wanted a trial immediately he still would never get it within the same day because A. The prosecution would never agree to that nor would the judge allow it B. The court’s schedule wouldn’t have an opening like that and C. The process of pre-trial takes time. To even just select a jury aka voir dire can take several days by itself. Other pre trial steps that would occur before a trial can start include a preliminary hearing in which the judge determines if there’s enough evidence against the defendant to have a trial, discovery in which both sides have to share their evidence and witness lists with each other prior to trial, and motions filed to the court to exclude or suppress certain evidence from trial. These steps take time and several appearances before the court that would be spread out over weeks at minimum.

Undermining a witness’s credibility like how Lex did with Eve by insinuating she was a scorned and resentful woman does not mean her entire testimony would get thrown out and excluded from trial. It is literally the job of the jury to weigh and value a witness’s testimony with their credibility. The jury could absolutely conclude Eve is not credible and lying BUT they would get to come to that conclusion on their own in deliberations bc a judge would never throw out a witness’s entire testimony unless there was definitive evidence the witness is lying (which there was not). Also, a witness could be deemed less credible and still have their testimony be believed because of supplementary evidence or corroborating witnesses like Lena.

Fruit of the poisonous tree. Related to the above point, Lena says Eve’s testimony was tainted because it was “fruit of the poisonous tree” which is NOT how that works in the slightest. Fruit of the poisonous tree is a real legal doctrine in which evidence is officially excluded from trial because it was obtained illegally by law enforcement. If the source of the evidence (lets say an illegal search without a warrant) is tainted, then anything gained (“the fruit”) from the source (“the tree”) is also tainted and inadmissible in court. Basically, fruit (ie evidence) from a poisonous tree (ie illegal search) is also poisonous and thus not allowed. But Eve’s testimony does not fall into this category at all. Just because her credibility was undermined and therefore the rest of her testimony is also undermined that does not mean it is illegal or excluded from being considered in court by the jury. At most she’s a failed witness bc her testimony is useless in the eyes of the jury but it is not in any shape or form inadmissible.

Just because Lex said a bunch of legal jargon to the judge doesn’t mean it A. had any weight or meaning and B. would actually be accepted by the judge. Lex asked the judge to have Eve’s testimony stricken from the record, her plea deal be revoked, and add a charge of perjury for her lies. All three motions would have been immediately denied because Lex didn’t provide an ounce of evidence that Eve was perjuring herself. See point 2 again because all he did was possibly and not even that effectively undermine her credibility by having her admit she was in love with him and rejected. That alternative theory could potentially be enough to negate her testimony in the jury’s eyes but it is most certainly not even remotely enough to get her testimony thrown out. Just because the defense offers a competing theory (which is literally the job of the defense) does not mean that theory is automatically accepted as fact or true. Again it is the job of the jury to determine that. Not to mention that this case was described as “ironclad” by Lillian and purported to be supported by hard evidence provided by Eve in addition to her testimony according to the prosecutor. Lex’s resentful lover theory wouldn’t necessarily negate that testimony or evidence! Lots of witnesses in real life are imperfect with questionable backgrounds or motives but their testimony can still be compelling to find a defendant guilty. Like this was such a thinly veiled, lazy attempt at a defense. Lex didn’t offer ANY evidence to support his claims other than his own testimony which was not legally admitted and should have been sustained and stricken which moves me to my next point.

Lex’s questioning of the witnesses was utterly objectionable and sustainable. Lawyers are bound by specific procedure and rules when questioning a witness. During cross examination, which is when a lawyer is questioning the other side’s witness, you are afforded more latitude by which to ask your questions in attempts to undermine an opposing witness’s credibility and testimony. You can ask leading questions aka yes or no questions (ex: you framed me because I rejected you, isn’t that right?) and you can even be combative with witnesses. However, what you absolutely CANNOT do is testify yourself and not ask the witness a question. This is literally what Lex did during his cross of both Eve and Lena. The objection that should and would have been raised is “Objection: Counselor (or in this case Defendant bc Lex is representing himself and not a lawyer) is testifying” to which the judge would have immediately agreed, sustained Lex, and have his entire monologue to the jury stricken and instructed them to ignore everything he said. A lawyer and especially someone representing themselves CANNOT use a witness’s time on the stand to testify themselves. That is what opening and closing arguments are for: uninterrupted presentation of your case. If Lex wanted to testify, he would have to take the stand and be subject to cross examination. He does not get to use his cross of Eve as a chance to say whatever he wants. ALSO as a side note, if a witness was so thoroughly undermined during cross, the lawyer who called the witness would get what is called a redirect, or extra time to question a witness to reestablish why their testimony is relevant and credible. Only a terrible prosecutor would choose not to redirect after that.

Also, between the scenes in court and those with Lena and Lillian, the show somehow implies both that Eve’s testimony was thrown out and that it was just merely undermined to the jury but not excluded? They can’t have it both ways lol.

When the judge actually sustains Lex for his improper questioning of Lena, she only says it once and lets him continue on his inadmissible tirade. In reality a judge would keep saying sustained or tell the defendant if they don’t stop now they’ll be held in contempt (aka put in jail until they’re ready to comply with the rules of the court). AND she would most definitely have instructed the jury that all of what he just said was sustained and couldn’t be considered.

Lex says “the defense rests” during the prosecution’s presentation and witness?! Like that’s not how it works. Lex technically hadn’t even started his presentation because he didn’t call any witnesses or present any evidence. He doesn’t just get to decide the trial is over during the prosecution’s case. The prosecution has to rest before the defense can even start let alone also rest their case.

This one isn’t so much a legal note but a weird observation. They have Willy shout “Yes!” after Lex “rests” implying Lex did more damage to himself with his speech and the jury would agree, only to then have Lena look half smug for beating him and half like she failed on the stand. They gave weird conflicting sentiments about the direction of the verdict that I guess was supposed to make the not guilty verdict a surprise but it all just fell flat and was super disjointed. And I’m sorry but Lex going on an unhinged rant would not help his perception or case to the jury even if he said he didn’t commit the crimes. Maybe the men would sympathize or project but those women would be taking that as a big sign of guilt. At the very least the jury should have been locked and unable to render a verdict thus declaring a mistrial which would have meant even more time as a new trial is set.

In conclusion, none of this makes sense nor is it how the courts actually work. I get everything doesn’t have to be über realistic but I would appreciate even a minutia of effort to make it make sense.

AND all of it was just entirely unnecessary for the episode. What they should have done is merely say Lex was awaiting trial and move on!

[eyndr-stories]

The Stranger The Better (FNAF SB fanfic) C18 - What A Wonderful World

Read the intro to Chapter 1 (Enter A Sleepy Bitchard) for more details! I'd start reading there anyways else things won't make a whole lot of sense lol

In Summary: Reader is a forever exhausted young adult who has social difficulties doing their best to pay the bills, so when they get hired at the well-paying, almost entirely automated Freddy Fazbear's Mega Pizza-Plex, they don't really hesitate to think things through before stumbling headfirst into a horror mystery surrounding this company and its crew of quirky (and surprisingly kind) animatronics.

Things To Know (lmk if I should add anything):

There are some horror elements in several chapters! This chapter is Not Spooky Whatsoever. This chapter is all sweet things and happiness.

Eventual romance, minorly important to the plot. (Romance isn't discussed much in this chapter but has been established)

Reader has paranoia.

There is much swearing.

Reader is also addicted to energy drinks, though at this point in the story they have put said addiction behind them.

Reader is nonbinary (and also trans masc) though it's not vital to the plot and only comes up once or twice.

Reader is from the south, is protective of their friends, and if you threaten their friends then I'm afraid you've yee'd your last haw and yes that is important to the plot

Previous Chapter | Chapter 18

C18 - What A Wonderful World

     The verdict was reached. Everyone was there in court, all your friends, Sun and Moon, even Greggory, who was seated atop Freddy's shoulders so he could see what was going on. Freddy held Bonnie in his arms. The doors had been propped open for DJMM, who was out in the hall, a bit too big to fit in the room. Little Music Man had taken up residence on the DJ's head, keeping him company. The court room was even more packed than before. It felt like everyone in town and then some was here to witness the verdict. You could barely see Omari in the crowd. She waved at you when you finally spotted her, and you cheerfully waved back.

     When the ruling came back stating that Fazbear Entertainment was guilty, on all charges, the entire room erupted into applause and cheer. DJMM started playing upbeat music from the hall. You smiled, and the last bit of tension finally left you. You looked over at Paige, who gave you a respectful nod. You almost wanted to give her the finger, but restrained yourself. You nodded back.

     News reporters were everywhere. Freddy was charming the crowd and telling everyone about how the animatronics all planned to get together and start up their own business, putting on shows, entertaining, and caring for kids. It'd be a much smaller production than the pizza-plex for sure, but since you planned to invest all the money you'd won in the business, you weren't too worried. You'd keep a little for yourself, just enough to live off of for a couple months, and take a little trip to the beach with your favorite jesters.

     You invited everyone to a party at your house, once you'd all managed to actually leave the court room. You invited Omari, but she declined, thanking you politely but stating that her party days were long behind her and she preferred it that way. She would be unwinding in her room with a glass of wine and a good novel, thank you very much.

     Following Freddy's advice, you decided to pay Vanessa a visit after the ruling. Moon and Sun didn't seem happy about it, but they didn't try to talk you out of it.

     Vanessa looked surprised to see you. She sat herself down across the table from you, glass barrier between you. You lifted the phone from the wall. She studied you for a long moment, then picked up her phone.

     "How you holding up?" you asked.

     "…I'm in jail," she said.

     "That's fair." You awkwardly pushed your thumb along the edge of the table. You weren't even sure why you'd come here. You knew that despite everything Vanessa had done to you and your friends, your loved ones, you still understood that she was in a great deal of pain. Pain that you could relate to, on some level.

     "It's not actually so bad. I've got my own cell and the food isn't horrible," Vanessa added.

     "Oh, good." You looked up at Vanessa. She looked tired. She was watching you, as if she was waiting for something.

     "Why are you here?" she asked.

     "I guess I just… wanted to see if you were okay."

     "…" Vanessa looked away, her expression tight. "I tried to kill you."

     "Who hasn't?" you joked.

     Vanessa looked back at you. "I've been doing a lot of thinking. Not much else to do in here, you know."

     "Oh yeah?"

     Vanessa tapped her fingers along the edge of the desk. She gazed down at the table for a moment before finally looking back up at you. "I've been thinking about… what you said."

     You waited patiently for her to continue. Vanessa sighed and put her face in her hand, elbow propped up on the table.

     "We weren't even friends. I was really rude to you. You still… I dunno why you seem to care about me so much, but I… I dunno." Vanessa pulled her hand away and met your gaze. "Thank you, I guess is what I mean to say. And for what it's worth, I am sorry. For everything."

     "I appreciate that," you said softly. You weren't sure what else to say.

     "Did you mean it? What you said, about things eventually getting better?" Vanessa asked.

     You nodded. "I did. Things can always get better, I promise."

     Vanessa looked at you for a long time. Finally, she smiled. "Thanks for coming to see me."

     "Yeah, of course. I can come back if you want?" you offered.

     "God, please. It's so boring here." Vanessa heaved a heavy sigh.

     You talked with Vanessa until your time was up. You told her about the ruling and Freddy's plans to open a new entertainment business. You promised to come back and visit often. Sun and Moon were waiting anxiously for you outside. When they asked you how it went, you told them it had gone a lot better than you were expecting, and you had plans to come back. They both seemed a little hesitant, but supported you none the less.

     The three of you made your way home. You had a party to get to.

~~~

     Your backyard was more than big enough to fit DJMM, who played some bangers while everyone laughed and chatted and celebrated together.

     Foxy turned out to be a fantastic dancer, peg leg and all, and demolished you in a short lived but well-spirited dancing competition.

     Little Music Man was being watched like a hawk by Moon, who'd caught him nosing through your stuff earlier.

     Monty seemed to be in much higher spirits. He was wearing the shades you'd given him, and squared off with you for a fake fight.

     Chica brought her guitar and you dusted off your piano keyboard to play a few songs with her.

     Roxy, her hair now sporting several different bright colors, gave you a pat on the back and told you that she was your number one fan.

     Greggory asked you if he could sit in the driver's seat of your RV, to which you agreed, and he pretended he was racing while Sun sat passenger and flailed around as if he were in a race car.

     Freddie and Bonnie mostly talked and laughed to themselves, though they both made sure to tell you how proud they were of you, and how thankful they were for the financial help in starting up the new business.

     Sun and Moon took turns dancing with you until you got tired. they convinced you to take a break, and you obliged, taking a seat in one of your fold out chairs and watching with absolute contentment as everyone talked and laughed together.

     You couldn't help but smile. Everyone was happy, everyone was safe. You'd quit your job at the deli, it'd been a while since you'd had a nightmare, and you honestly felt great. You were eating better, sleeping better, and your cravings for energy drinks were all but gone. The future held exciting possibilities, but you made sure to focus on the moment and enjoy it.

     Your garden was blooming, buds and blossoms happy under the good weather. The fence was finished and lovely, and the forest was teeming with energy and life. The skies were clear, you were surrounded by friends and loved ones, and everything was wonderful.

     Just wonderful.

[browniefox]

But Trucy? She was My Light.

@wrightfamilyweek day 7 - light and darkness. And here, at least, we reach the end of the seven years. Trucy asks her daddy some questions and finally gets some answers to them, and life goes on.

Had a lot of fun with this, and I'm so glad I was able to participate!

oOo

Daddy isn’t home after the trial.

Trucy goes home with Apollo when it’s all said and done, when the verdict is announced. The world feels elastic on the edges, unreal, impossible to conceive of. No matter how much Trucy could try to sharpen her vision, to see lies and tells, it’d be impossible to actually understand the world, or understand what she’s feeling.

There was cheering when Vera was proclaimed ‘not guilty’, and a few words said to Klavier on the courthouse steps with phone numbers exchanged and promises to meet up again later, and the silence in the taxi was filled up by Apollo rambing about the details of the trial, a play-by-play of it coming all together, but after they get out of the taxi, both of them are silent as they climb the stairs back to the office. The door is opened, and even though Daddy’s motorcycle was out front, Daddy himself isn’t there. Apollo flips down onto the couch, hands rubbing his face, and Trucy sets the blanket over him.

“Trucy-” Apollo starts and Trucy wags her finger at him.

“Ah-ah-ah, remember, I can tell when someone is lying too, and you are absolutely exhausted!” Trucy points out. He frowns.

“I mean, you were there the whole time, too.” He rebutes. Trucy shrugs.

“Well, I wanna find Daddy first.”

“Trucy-”

“Nighty-night, Polly, take a good nap! You still have end-of-trial paperwork, you know!”

Apollo groans and burrows down into the couch. Trucy slips back out of into the hallway, and the show-smile drops away from her face. She’s trying not to think about Daddy - the first one - right now, she needs to focus on getting to Daddy - the second one.

She has a feeling she knows where he is.

There’s a trick to getting the roof door to unlock, one that Aunt Mia taught Daddy, and Daddy taught Trucy. Sometimes, when Trucy needs more room to practice her show, she’ll come up here and perform to the sky. She’s also come up here a lot to find Daddy before.

Her eyes immediately go to the edges of the roof. So many times, she’s seen him standing near the edge, or sitting his his feet dangling into the air. He claims he just enjoys the view, and Trucy knows that’s a lie.

Daddy isn’t standing on any of the ledges this time, and it takes a moment for Trucy to find him. He’s leaning up against the back wall of the roof entrance, in the shade, head tipped back against the wall. His beanie is shoved into his pocket, spiky-haired rats nest clearly out and in view, but for the view of only Trucy and any passing birds.

There’s a lot of things she wants to say right now, a lot of jumbled-up things she’s wanted to say to him for years and years, answers she finally got and wished she had before, darkness and innocence she’d been kept in and sort of wishes she still had. Somehow, miraculously, when she opens her mouth, something comes out, and she doesn’t even regret it entirely, so it’s not too bad.

“You knew who he was.”

Daddy’s eyes had been closed, and now they open, half-lidded, looking at her. He seems to weight his answer carefully, and then finally says,

“Yes, I did. Not at first. It’d been seven years, but I knew who Shadi was before he died.”

“Were you going to tell me?”

“I’d like to think so. He wanted to pass on the rights to the Gramarye tricks to you. I’m not sure how I’d explain getting my hands on that otherwise,” Daddy says, and it’s the truth, “But then… well, you know what happened, then.”

She does. She’d barely paid any attention to the man they were saying Daddy killed, because she was too busy worrying about her Daddy, about him coming home, about not being abandoned again. It’s a day she doesn’t think she’ll ever forget. She’d never been that scared before - certainly not when her first Daddy gotten arrested. That first time, it hadn’t felt real, and she hadn’t entirely understood everything that was at stake. She most definitely didn’t know that she was going to help her Daddy leave her. Not that she’s sure she would’ve done anything different, even with everything she knows now.

Because her first Daddy was alive, and was in town, and didn’t come to see her. And he tried to ruin Daddy’s reputation as an undefeated poker player. And she loves him. And she hates him. And… well, what’s the point of feeling anything about him, when he’s gone now? Has been gone for months? Has been gone for years?

“I wish things were different.” Daddy, her current one, offers.

She can’t tell if he’s lying or not.

“So now what?” She asks. Daddy closes his eyes again.

“As soon as I know, I’ll tell you.” He promises.

“Was it all about Gavin, this whole time?”

“... no, it wasn’t. It was about trying to create something better for you. Everybody I know, everybody I love, has gone through the same flawed court system, has been torn apart - or nearly so - by antiquated rules. It was time for change. I never expected things to go like this, I never even let myself hope my name would be cleared. I just wanted to know that if something happened to you, even though I can’t stand on the defense, there’s still a chance you’ll get out safe.” Daddy sounds defeated as he says it. She wonders if, had things gone differently, if Gavin never killed first Daddy, if new Daddy would never have ever told her what his Secret Project was, and she would’ve watched the changing to the court system with no clue her Daddy had been the mastermind, the driving force, behind it all. She wonders if the Secret Project would’ve happened at all.

It’s all so many questions, and so many what-if’s. And Daddy is answering her questions, plainly, clearly, without hesitation.

But they have tomorrow, and the next day, and the next week and month and years and years and years to clear the air, to untangle and make sense of their first seven years as a family. There’s nothing to fear anymore, no boogie-man just outside the office door.

“C’mon Daddy, let’s go talk to Polly.”

Trucy holds her hand out, and Daddy takes it, climbing to his feet, out of the shadows and into the warm sunshine.

[marjansmarwani]

we won the cosmic lottery

2.1k || ao3

When Mya convinces Carlos to try speed dating on what would otherwise be a lonely Valentine’s Day, he’s pretty sure it’s going to be a disaster. Until a man who manages to light up his world with one look slides into the seat before him, that is. Suddenly he’s feeling a lot more optimistic.

Or, Tarlos Alternate First Meeting: Speed Dating Edition

I wrote fluff again and I am probably more surprised than you are. 

But I found this prompt from @madamewriterofwrongs in my inbox from several months ago and figured why not write a Valentine’s Day fic and try to stretch those fluff muscles again. Beta’d by @officereyes 💕 

-----------

As bad ideas went, Carlos was pretty sure this was one. 

“I cannot believe I let you talk me into this.” 

“What, you had other hot plans for Valentine’s Day?” Mya asked him, raising a skeptical eyebrow at him over her drink. 

“No,” Carlos admitted, “but that doesn’t mean this was the correct alternative.” 

“Why not? You’ll waste an hour of your life, talk to some people, come out with some good stories if nothing else. I think it sounds like the perfect alternative to spending the night home alone with Netflix.” 

“Don’t knock it until you’ve tried it,” he told her, tipping his glass to her before taking another drink.

“I have tried it Carlos, far too many times. You have too - that’s why we’re here.” 

“To get a look at Austin’s future serial killers?” 

Mya rolled her eyes at him before lightly smacking his arm with her clutch, “No, Officer Buzzkill. We’re here for a chance to maybe meet Mr. or Ms. Right.” 

Carlos twisted on his stool to survey the crowd gathered in the reserved section of the bar. He typically didn’t like to make assumptions without at least trying to get to know someone first, but he could honestly say that none of the men in the crowd even gave him the slightest glimmer of hope for the evening. He should have stayed home. 

He turned back to Mya with a dubious expression and she rolled her eyes again, “Lighten up Carlos, at the very least it can’t hurt.”

Carlos cast a glance back to one guy who was leering at him from the other side of the room and grimaced, “I’m not too sure about that.” 

His partner opened her mouth to respond but was interrupted by someone grabbing a microphone and calling the crowd to attention. 

“Good evening lonely hearts!” the host said once the din of the crowd had died down. Carlos shot Mya a look but she ignored him. 

“We’re going to get started here in a few minutes,” the host continued, “but before we start moving I just wanted to go over the specifics. Upon checking in you were given a bracelet. These are to help with the logistics. If you received a red bracelet you will be taking a seat at any of the open tables. If you got a pink one you will be rotating between the tables.”

Carlos glanced down at his wrist to see a red bracelet sitting there. Mya held up her own wrist to show another red one, “Looks like we both get to have people come to us tonight.” 

Carlos chuckled at her before turning his attention back to the host, who was still explaining the rules. 

“When the bell dings, you will rotate to the table to your right. You will have 3 minutes with each potential suitor and when the bell rings, you will move to the next one. Make sure that you write down their number and check yes or no before you part on the card provided - that’s how we will be pairing you! At the end of the evening we will be comparing all the lists and you will receive a list of the names and contact info of any suitors you mutually matched with to the email provided. After that, the ball is in your court! So make sure you make the most of these three minutes; it could be the time you find your soulmate!” 

The room filled with polite clapping and Carlos turned again to Mya, “You can’t be serious.” 

“Lighten up Reyes,” she said with a wink, “you wouldn’t want to scare your potential soulmate away.” 

“Fine, I’ll ‘lighten up’. But if one of these creeps murders me to make a skin suit, I’m holding you personally responsible.” 

“I don’t believe in ghosts so your threats have no effect on me.” 

There were several more things he wanted to say to his partner, but he was interrupted by the sound of the host telling them all to head to their respective areas. As they went to stand up, Mya reached out to touch his arm, “it’s going to be fine Carlos, really. You’ve got this; try to have some fun for once.” 

Her tone and expression were much more gentle than before and he took a deep breath, forcing himself to relax, “Thanks Mya,” he replied with a grateful smile. “Now go find Ms. Right.” 

She matched his smile and with a wave, she was gone. Carlos took another steady breath and headed to the guy’s section of the room, taking a seat at one of the tables. He pulled the card out of his jacket pocket and picked up one of the pencils waiting on the table, twirling it through his fingers anxiously. And when the first contender of the night slid into the seat before him he forced on a warm smile and held out his hand in greeting. Mya was right, he had this. 

--------

7 dates later he was less sure he had this. 

They hadn’t all been creeps, per se (though numbers 2 and 6 definitely had been) but they also hadn’t done anything to elicit any kind of spark in Carlos. They had been nice enough and reasonably good looking, but Carlos had decided a long time ago that good enough wasn’t worth the effort. If he was going to try and make a go of something with someone, they had to be someone who made him feel something. It had to be worth the risk. 

He was contemplating his abysmal luck when the next guy slid into the chair across from him. Carlos looked up and all coherent thoughts fled his head. This guy was... gorgeous was the only word Carlos could come up with that did him justice. Everything about him was perfect and Carlos couldn’t bring himself to look away. 

He eventually noticed the extended hand in what he sincerely hoped was a normal amount of time and took it, still studying him as he blurted out the first thought that came to mind: “I didn’t see you here before.” 

He definitely hadn’t been here when things were starting, Carlos would have noticed him in a crowd, he was absolutely sure about that. The other man smiled sheepishly, “yeah, I got here a bit late. I was trying to convince myself to actually come. My friends had to practically push me in the door.” 

Carlos chuckled, “My friend had to pretty much drag me here with her. Are your friends here?” 

“They’re at a bar down the street for ‘moral support’,” he responded with an eye roll, but a fond expression. 

“That’s so helpful.” 

“Isn’t it?” 

They both laughed again before Carlos suddenly realized they had yet to even exchange names, “I’m Carlos, by the way.” 

“TK, nice to meet you.” 

“That’s an interesting name. Does it stand for something?” 

TK grinned at him coyly, “It does, but that’s at least a level 4 backstory, and we’re barely at level one.” 

Carlos grinned back, feeling the quip come easily despite the butterflies definitely fluttering in his stomach, “Well, we’ve got some time to work on that. Personally though I recommend we skip over levels 1 and 2, those are mundane at best.” 

TK’s green eyes lit up as he laughed. The sound sent a shock through Carlos’s entire body and in that moment, Carlos decided he had been wrong. He owed Mya an apology: this had been an excellent idea after all. 

-----

His three minutes with TK had not been nearly long enough. When the bell had dinged he had nearly jumped out of his skin. He had been so absorbed in their conversation he hadn't noticed the passage of time. It felt like they had been talking all night, but also as if they had barely begun to talk at all. 

TK gave him an apologetic smile as he stood from his chair, “I guess that’s my cue. It was really nice talking to you though, Carlos.”

“Yeah, you too,” he responded. He hesitated for a moment as he studied the other man. In only three minutes he had felt more of a connection with TK than he had with people he had dated for weeks. Maybe it was that they were both first responders, maybe it was something else, but he wasn’t ready to let this go. So many things were mysteries, but Carlos knew one thing for sure: if he let TK walk away from him tonight, he might just end up regretting it for the rest of his life. 

“Would you maybe like to catch up when we’re done here? Maybe get a drink, talk some more?” 

TK paused mid-stride, raising an eyebrow, “You still have two more dates left, how do you know you won’t want to spend the evening with them instead?” 

“Call it intuition.” 

He could call it intuition or blind hope or desperation if he wanted, Carlos really didn’t care. He just knew in his gut that it was right, that TK was someone he needed to get to know more. TK was still considering him, and Carlos anxiously awaited his verdict. This was so far outside of his comfort zone and he was pretty sure that if TK turned him down he was going to head back to his condo tonight and not leave for at least two days, too buried in embarrassment and shame to face the outside world. But this felt worth the risk; he just hoped he hadn’t read these feelings wrong. 

Finally, after what felt like a lifetime passing in the moment of a breath, TK smiled. “I’d like that,” he said, “I guess bachelors 9 and 10 are out of luck for both of us then.” 

“Try to let them down easy.” 

TK laughed again, squeezing his shoulder as he walked away, “As long as you promise to do the same—getting turned down by you would be a tough pill to swallow, Carlos. Try to break their hearts gently.”  

-------

Carlos was still feeling the euphoria of TK’s smile 10 minutes later when a figure slid into the seat next to him at the bar. He turned eagerly, ready to see TK’s eyes again and felt disappointment, followed by instant guilt, when it wasn’t TK but Mya occupying the seat next to him. 

“Well that was a waste of time,” she declared as she slumped forward onto the bar, “you were right. I shouldn’t have dragged you here, I’m sorry. Wanna go get tacos at that truck you love to drown our sorrows?” 

“Actually,” Carlos began, but their conversation was interrupted by the sound of someone calling his same from behind them. They turned in tandem and Carlos felt his heart beat just a little faster at the sight of TK, who was looking between him and Mya. 

“Hey Carlos, I just wanted to see if you were ready for that drink yet. If you’re not we can...” 

Mya interrupted before TK could finish his sentence, “I was just leaving, actually. I’m Mya, by the way—Carlos’s partner and friend.” 

TK turned his gorgeous smile on her and held out a hand, “TK Strand, nice to meet you.” 

“TK’s a firefighter,” Carlos told Mya, biting back a smile as she raised an eyebrow and TK nodded, “I’m with the 126.”

“Well, TK Strand with the 126, take good care of my partner here. He’s pretty special.” 

“I’ve already gotten that feeling,” TK agreed, giving Carlos another grin that he felt straight through to his soul. 

Mya smirked as she stood from her seat, looking between them as she pulled out her keys, “I’d say have a good rest of the night, but I think that’s already a given. I’ll see you on Monday Carlos, don’t do anything I wouldn’t do.”

“And that would be what, exactly?” 

Mya shrugged as she started to walk away, “I’m sure I’ll think of something.” 

“Text me when you get home!” he called after her. 

“Yes mom!” she called back as she reached the door. Before she opened it to head out into the Austin night she turned one more time and shot him a smile and a thumbs up. He rolled his eyes fondly, but nodded. Then she was gone and he turned all of his attention to the man beside him. He was grinning too and Carlos was starting to get the feeling that he might never get used to the things that smile did to him.  

TK slid into Mya’s abandoned seat and leaned closer to him, “So where do we start?” 

Carlos smiled back and waved down the bartender to get drinks for them. He wasn’t sure where to begin, but he had a feeling wherever it was would be the beginning of something great. He turned and caught TK’s eyes again, savoring the warmth that emanated from them. 

Tonight may have started out feeling like a mistake, but he was starting to think it may have actually been more like fate. 

[rollychan]

Okay, turns out I have more to say about the first Loki series episode already.

But first a preface/disclaimer: 1) I welcome all opinions if they’re stated respectfully / without any insulting of or jibing at others or other groups of fans (I mean it, any “some fans *rollyeyes*” will get you a swift block and Idgaf which side you’re on, I have no time for that bullshit) 2) I am a mere unintelligent trashcan of a person and also my native language isn’t English so excuse me if my thoughts here aren’t deep or intelligent enough or thought through. They are my own, though. 3) These thoughts will NOT be very organized. I apologize in advance.

Thoughts under the cut.

The TVA and Dystopian Themes

The first point I’d like to make is that the first episode gives me major classic dystopian vibes just set in a very bureaucratic world. I will explain why:

1) The fact that Loki is arrested for time crimes he wasn’t even aware he is committing and that are decided on by some mysterious few authorities nobody ever seems to see.

Let me expand on this. It feels very much like it’s another powerful dictator-like power, like Big Brother from 1984, like the ten world leaders from Brave New World. They dictate how things should be. They decide on exactly the one timeline that they allow to exist and any variance from that is punishable by death. In 1984, you had the Thought Police and an arbitrarily chosen enemy you had to hate that changed from time to time and everyone had to follow those changes, in Brave New World, it’s a bit trickier, but basically, people were genetically modified (was it before birth? I can’t quite remember that well the details of it) and pre-determined to be in one of three (or four? it’s been years if not a decade+ since I last read the book) classes by deciding on their intelligence and other factors. Pre-determination, rigid behavioral rules, no straying from the decided upon social norms. That’s what they all have in common. Not to mention the brainwashing. “War is Peace / Freedom is Slavery / Ignorance is Strength” anyone? The TVA might as well get such a slogan for themselves. The people working for the TVA all seem very brainwashed. The guy at the desk that stowed away the Tesseract grew up behind the desk, for godssake, he doesn’t even know what a fish is. Just like people in Brave New World are brainwashed from their birth.

“A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude.” (Brave New World)

The TVA, like the people in the Brave New World, want there to be no conflict (forced happiness is the thing in BNW). They believe in what they do, and Mobius is actually very much a product of that. He believes he is doing the right thing. He believes that getting a Loki variant on his side will solve the problem the TVA are facing with the other Loki variant they are chasing. He will do anything for this goal, but he does have a different idea from the other characters we have met so far. They don’t think a Loki variant will help, but they are still all working towards the same goal.

And, I mean:

“You will be lifted clean out from the stream of history. We shall turn you into gas and pour you into the stratosphere. Nothing will remain of you; not a name in a register, not a memory in a living brain. You will be annihilated in the past as well as in the future. You will never have existed.” (1984)

I get major 1984 vibes here.

(I do think that Mobius might change his stance towards the TVA throughout the course of the series and I think he’s an interesting character to follow. But in the beginning, he’s still wholly entrenched. Him having a different opinion from the rest of the TVA does look like some foreshadowing though.

I have seen some people say the TVA is framed positively, which I respect as their opinion, but I don’t agree. I have seen nothing that cements in stone they’re the good guys here (there are some scenes I view as neutral and Mobius’ introduction I view as framing him as not totally evil, not the whole TVA as good). If anything, I get the feeling they are very powerful dictators and Loki caved because he realized how powerless he truly is there. But I guess that could be just me.)

2) Nothing is explained to Loki. There is no instance that acts in Loki’s defense. In fact, from what we have seen, there is usually no way anyone accused of time crimes can influence the court verdict. It is entirely one-sided and pre-determined unless someone from the TVA wants them alive.

Like, that is a major indicator of something being very very fishy here. No one who has a shred of morality will think that is just. Everyone accused of a crime has the right to a fair process, to a defense, to an appeal. Nothing about this process is fair. Everything about this process screams dystopia to me.

Loki isn’t even treated with dignity like every fucking criminal still has a right to in democratic countries. Getting the clothes lasered off without a warning? Would be a major human rights violation. Getting dragged left and right and dropped through floors? Major human rights violation.

This is, partly, played for laughs, but also not entirely. Loki does realize how little power he holds in that place and that moment is played seriously. It’s dictatorian, it’s unjust, it’s rigid.

3) People are arbitrarily erased / killed (”reset” is the term they use, I believe? When they use those glowsticks?)

For things like refusing to take a ticket and then having no ticket. When nothing is explained to them before.

The court process is a joke. It’s a farce, they go through some (not even all) standard motions of court preceedings but there is 0 chance for the accused to win. It’s all an illusion, as Loki so correctly points out. Nobody questions it but him, but it very much is all an illusion, a mask for the dictatorship underneath.

I’m, like, 80% sure the ticket bs is there so they don’t have to deal with everyone and can get rid of the annoying variants before they ever reach the “court”.

Basically, I think the TVA are supposed to be dystopian. It fits right in. (There is so much more in my brain but currently I lack the words to express it)

Loki and Continuity

The first half of the episode feels very over-the-top. There is so much over-acting going on with Tom Hiddleston that I don’t understand. He feels incredibly OOC in that first half (save for a couple moments, perhaps). The panicky fumbling for the ticket after he saw another variant being “erased”? That’s so much NOT Loki it’s not funny. I can overlook the thing about signing the papers that are supposed to be “everything he ever said” but some things are so OOC they are not even in the same universe as Loki’s original characterisation (of the T1 & Avengers 1 Loki) is anymore. That ticket fumbling moment, for example.

They did go over basically all his life in that scene with Mobius (though Mobius was absent for a bunch of it). Those emotional moments were raw and IC, in my opinion (the way he reacts to his own death - btw, anyone reading this before watching the episode: they show the IW death scene and while the moment he dies happens while the camera shows Loki’s reaction to it, you can still hear the audio of it, so beware!) I think that moment he breaks down is well-done. And it’s in that vulnerable state that Mobius finds him and gives him the final manipulative push to tell Mobius what Mobius wants to hear.

If they pick up on these themes - the dystopian dictatorship that the TVA are in reality and Loki having to come to terms with never being able to turn back and freedom vs. determinism (chaos vs. rigid order?), it can turn out to be a decent show.

I have way more thoughts but I’ve already spent way too much time on this so here you go.

[beardedmrbean]

Prosecutors in the Paris attacks trial on Friday demanded a life sentence without parole for the main suspect in the November 2015 jihadist strike that killed 130 in France's worst-ever terror assault.

Salah Abdeslam, a 32-year-old Frenchman, is the only surviving member of the attackers who opened fire in the packed Bataclan concert hall and on cafe terraces in adjacent streets, and detonated suicide bombs at the Stade de France sports arena.

The request that Abdeslam should not have the possibility of parole is extremely rare in France, where prisoners serving life sentences are often released after 20 to 25 years.

Also on trial are 19 others accused of various degrees of assistance to the killers, from providing logistical support to planning the attacks or supplying weapons.

Prosecutors also requested standard life sentences for suspected Islamic State members, Swedish citizen Osama Krayem and Tunisian Sofien Ayari, and one for Mohamed Abrini, a Belgian accused of having provided weapons and logistical support.

Abrini, known as the "man in the hat" from video footage, would go on to take part in suicide bombings that struck Brussels in 2016, though he decided not to detonate his vest at the last minute.

Abdeslam has also claimed during the trial that he had a last-minute change of heart, which failed to convince the prosecution.

The length of the trial, its emotional charge and the number of plaintiffs -- 2,500 -- have made it the most impactful legal proceedings in French history.

The remainder of the trial will now be dedicated to closing statements by defence lawyers.

The verdict is due on June 29.

"Those who committed these heinous crimes are nothing more than lowlife terrorists and criminals," one prosecutor, Nicolas Le Bris, told the court on Friday at the end of three days of closing statements by the prosecution.

"The bloodthirsty fury of these criminals was without limit," he said.

They wanted "a massacre and carnage" when they attacked the Bataclan "and sadly they succeeded," he said. "A balmy November evening turned into a nightmare."

On Wednesday, prosecutor Camille Hennetier had told the court that what would be remembered about the trial were the names of the victims being read out in court and the testimony of the survivors, but also "the cruelty of the terrorists who fired again and again and took pleasure in killing".

Even after years of painstaking investigation, "much remains in the dark" about how the attacks were planned and carried out, she said.

"Most of the accused know. They know everything and have never spoken, and probably will never answer," she said.

Abdeslam, who was arrested in Belgium after five months on the run, kept silent during the police investigation but started talking during the trial, explaining how he gave up plans to blow himself up, and apologised to victims.

But his tearful appeal for forgiveness had little impact on the prosecutors, who believe that his explosive belt simply malfunctioned.

Prosecutors also said that Abdeslam's claim that he was recruited by a jihadist cell only a few days before the attacks was "illogical".

A verdict of life in prison without parole has been handed down only four times since it was implemented in 1994, and all but rules out a later reduction of the sentence, and only after at least 30 years behind bars.

Prosecutors also requested standard life sentences for Mohamed Bakkali, accused of being the logistics coordinator of the attacks, as well as for five suspected Islamic State members believed to have been killed in Syria or Iraq.

For the remaining suspects, sentences of five to 16 years were requested.

[noirandchocolate]

All right, since I was asked very nicely by a couple people when I complained in general about how Americans don’t get properly taught about their own Constitutional rights, here is a post explaining why, in the US, jurors are not permitted to do their own research outside the courtroom (even if they think something a witness said might be incorrect or ‘wrong’).

The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution states that a person may not be deprived of her life, liberty, or property “without due process of law.”  More specifically, the Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a trial by “an impartial jury,” and the right to be “confronted with the witnesses against him.” 

The “impartial jury” rule has been interpreted to mean, among other things, that the jury must make its decision based solely on the evidence presented in court, and that the verdict must not be tainted by outside influences.  The “witness confrontation” rule also comes into play with this topic, as I’ll explain below.  But basically, the short answer to the question “why can’t jurors do their own research?” is “because the Constitution says they can’t, and the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.”  But that doesn’t explain WHY that’s the rule, and is therefore unsatisfying, so here’s some good reasons why a criminal defendant shouldn’t want jurors to be able to consider things outside the evidence presented at their trial!

1)  Publicity--One of the major things jurors are instructed not to look at while a trial is ongoing is news media.  Why?  Because news outlets are not forbidden from reporting about ongoing criminal matters (First Amendment!), and exposure to such publicity can jeopardize the impartiality of a juror.  Let’s say you are charged with robbing a convenience store, and your trial has just started.  A news reporter posts an article online about the robbery.  It has a pretty sensational headline, something like “Father of Two Threatened with Gun in Convenience Store Holdup.”  A juror hearing your case, let’s call him Rick, is curious about the location of the store, and googles its name.  The news article comes up and Rick sees this headline.  Oh, wow, the cashier has kids?  He was threatened?  It was a “holdup”?  That sounds terrible!!  Humans are very susceptible creatures and can be swayed by all kinds of things.  Would you, the defendant, want Rick to read that headline, much less the article giving out a bunch of details that haven’t (yet, or ever) been revealed in court?  Would you trust Rick to listen to your side of the story, and base his decision in your case on the evidence in court, after reading such inflammatory things about the incident?

Many times, very high-profile cases are moved out of the jurisdiction where they would normally be tried, because the local area has been inundated with pretrial publicity making it difficult to find jurors who haven’t heard about the case and formed some kind of opinion, conscious or unconscious, about it.  Keeping a sitting jury from being exposed to media publicity during a trial is just as important.

2) Right to Confront Witnesses--As stated above, the Sixth Amendment guarantees this.  What does it mean?  That the prosecution must base its case on witness testimony and evidence that it puts before the jury in court, and you the defendant must be given a chance to cross-examine those witnesses about their testimony and the evidence presented, to call its truth into question, challenge whether it establishes all the elements of the crime you’re charged with, or otherwise poke holes in the case against you.  This is the reason hearsay evidence is barred unless one of a number of exceptions applies.  So what does that have to do with jurors doing outside research?

In our faux robbery trial, let’s say that juror Keisha thought there were some gaps or inconsistencies in the cashier’s testimony, so she looks him up online to see if he talked about being robbed on social media closer to when it happened.  Not only does she find his tweets from right after the incident, which bolster the story he told on direct examination (and that your counsel did their best to bash holes in during cross), she finds his cousin’s Facebook.  The cousin has an emotionally charged post about how the cashier came to her house sobbing after talking to police, and everything he told her about the robbery.  During deliberations, Keisha shares the tweets and the cousin’s post with the other jurors.  Now, wouldn’t you be mad if you found out that there was another witness against you in the case (the cousin) that you didn’t get a chance to question?  Wouldn’t you be upset to hear that the jurors were using the cashier’s tweets as evidence for your guilt, when the prosecutor didn’t present them in court and you didn’t get an opportunity to ask the cashier about them (and they may have been inadmissible, as discussed below)?  Your Sixth Amendment right to confrontation has been violated, because a juror did outside research!

3) Expert Witnesses--This is obviously linked with the last point.  When explaining evidence will involve some technical knowledge, the prosecution may present an “expert” witness to provide that background and knowledge.  Such an expert might or might not have any other link to the current case.  For example, where a gun is involved in a crime, a ballistics expert might be called to testify in general about bullet calibers, how guns work and how bullets can be matched to them, etc., and then may be asked to provide an expert opinion based on that knowledge--perhaps whether, after performing some examination, she believes a bullet fired into the floor of the convenience store during the robbery appears to “match” with a gun found in your home.  Before an expert witness may provide such testimony, both the prosecution and the defense will ask her questions about her qualifications as an expert, such as her education on the subject, whether she has any certifications in the field, whether she attends ongoing training to update her knowledge, things like that.  Then, the judge will make a finding whether the qualifications are sufficient for her to testify as an expert, and will tell the jury that it should consider those qualifications when deciding whether her opinion has any weight.

Now, for an example, let’s say juror Winn didn’t think the ballistics expert sounded very certain about matching the bullet to the gun police claim they found in your home, and is wondering how much weight  they should even give the witness’s testimony.  At home, they do a quick google search to see if the kind of gun police claim was at your house uses the type of bullet they found at the store.  They find a website listing many types of guns and bullets, read that the gun can indeed fire that type of bullet, and even see the site creator’s opinion that this kind of gun is an “assault weapon” and that those bullets are particularly damaging.  During deliberations, Winn tells the other jurors what they learned.  Whoops!  That website may have been used by the jury as an “expert witness,” despite the fact that its creator may only be a hobbyist gun enthusiast without formal education!  You didn’t get to question this mysterious person about their qualifications to speak about ballistics, you didn’t get to cross-examine their opinions...and you should really file an appeal if you’re convicted.

4) Inadmissible Evidence--Prior to any criminal trial, there will probably be at least some discussion (and motions) by your counsel and the prosecutor about whether certain evidence is admissible at trial.  For example, your lawyer might move to suppress your confession to police, because they used improper interrogation tactics or violated your Miranda rights.  Or, if you have a prior record, the State might try to submit evidence of your earlier convictions (a type of evidence that is highly prejudicial, because it makes it look like you’re “a criminal,” particularly if your prior conviction involves a similar offense to the one currently charged).  In fact, let’s go with that example.  Let’s say you have a prior conviction for assault, from several years ago.  The court rules that the prosecution may not bring up that conviction to make you look bad during their case.  However, if you choose to testify, the prosecutor will be allowed to ask you some basic information about it--its degree, and when it happened, but NOT what offense it was for--so the jury can assess the credibility of your testimony with the knowledge that you have broken the law before.  Maybe you choose to testify anyway, and that “sanitized” (a legal term) info is told to the jury.

Hearing that you had a prior conviction, Amir is curious, and searches for your name and the phrase “conviction.”  He finds the record of your conviction, which is public, and finds out it was for assault.  Well, the very information the court ruled inadmissible is soon shared with the whole jury, and several members now think of you not just as someone with some vague prior offense, but as someone who assaults people.  You know.  Like a robber does.  Alternatively, let’s say you decided not to testify, because you worried that the jury would find out you had a prior conviction and become biased against you.  So, the prosecutor wasn’t allowed to talk about the subject at all.  But Amir still wondered in general about what kind of person you are, so he still did his google search for your name and found out about your conviction anyway.  You gave up your chance to tell your side of the story, and the jury still discovered exactly what you wanted to hide! 

This point can also dovetail with the prior ones.  What if Amir found your mom’s blog post where she mentioned how you confessed the robbery to police, despite the fact that the judge ruled your confession inadmissible and the jury would otherwise have no idea it existed?  The jury now knows that you “confessed,” but since the confession was never discussed at trial you didn’t have a chance to cross-examine the cops that interrogated you about the subject.  So the jury doesn’t know they withheld food from you for hours and wouldn’t let you speak to your attorney.  As far as the jury knows, the cops did nothing wrong!  You didn’t get the chance to confront that evidence against you.

5) Mistakes or Misinformation--Seriously, a website might have a typo in it.  The problem can be as stupid and yet as vital as that.  Plenty of sites have agendas or viewpoints they’re trying to push, too.  Sure, a person testifying in court might lie (on pain of being found out and charged with perjury!) or make a mistake or not remember something correctly.  But it’s a really bad idea to add into that mix the chaos of internet research, when a criminal defendant’s liberty is on the line.  Jurors are expected to evaluate whether they think witnesses are credible based on what goes on in the courtroom.  Allowing them to “check” witness testimony online, using sites that might also not be credible at all, simply doesn’t make sense.  In court, at least a witness can be cross-examined.  You can’t cross-examine a juror’s Wikipedia trail.

6) Even Positive Stuff is Bad--Okay, you may be saying, but all these examples involve jurors discovering stuff that’s bad for me the hypothetical defendant.  What if a juror googles a cop witness and finds his racist tweets, hurting his credibility?  What if a witness lies about something, and a juror finds their Facebook where they told the real story?  What if a witness misstates something and a juror looks up a website that tells them the accurate facts?  That would help me!  I guess so, and the lack of prejudice to you the defendant’s constitutional rights might be taken into account if, say, the prosecutor finds out about these types of jury taint and moves for a mistrial.  But the government also has a strong interest in maintaining the integrity of a trial, and that will also be weighed.

In the end, the answer to the question “why don’t we let jurors do outside research” is “because your Constitutional right to a fair trial is so important.”  You shouldn’t be deprived of your liberty without due process, and due process includes the right to question, cross-examine, and call into question all of the evidence against you.  As a result, the verdict in your case needs to be based on the evidence officially presented in court during your trial, not whatever mishmash of sources the jury might discover outside.  Even though there might be the off chance that some juror’s research could help your side, there are so many ways you could be hurt by it.  If you were facing the possibility of several years in prison, would you want to take that chance, and have this key rule be changed?

[akalei]

Today’s The Day

I’m not dead and neither is this AU! Thank you all so much for the love and as always I hope you enjoy and please feel free to send me asks for more info :)

@ozmav

@kelelamentia

@resignedcatservant

@imfreakingmagical

@northernbluetongue

@tinybrie

@constancetruggle

@foofoocuddlypoopsgavesokkaapples

@queen-of-the-trash-planet-tm

@mooshoon

@hypnosharkrebeldreamer

@mystery-5-5

@vixen-uchiha

@persephonebutkore

@weird-pale-blonde-person

@wargraymon0709

@be-happy-every-day-please

@shreky-boi

@worlds-tiniest-spook-pastry

@7-sage-7

@thesunanditsangel

@ilovefluffbutsmutisalsogreat

@emeraldpuffguide

@aegyobutpsycho2

@bluefyoto94

@toodaloo-kangaroo

@zotinha456

@readeracctagmepls

@user00000003

@neakco

@nathleigh

@emjrabbitwolf

Today was THE day and Marinette was a complete mess. She barely slept but still managed to miss her alarm. While getting dressed she not only banged her knee on her desk but also fell down the stairs. 

Marinette Dupain-Cheng was a complete and utter mess and she was only a bystander. 

“Marinette, why don’t you sit down and have some breakfast?” her mother asked, looking at her daughter, concerned as she got up from the ground. 

Marinette bit her lip as she glanced over at the empty bowl and plate of croissants on the table, “I don’t know Mom,” she placed a hand on her stomach already filled with knots, “I’m too nervous to eat.”

Sabine shook her head, “I know you’re worried about Adrien but there’s nothing more you can do to help him,” she reached out and kissed Marinette’s forehead, “just have faith and eat.” 

Marinette raised an eyebrow, it wasn’t like she didn’t have faith in Adrien or his Justice League approved lawyers, she just doesn’t trust Gabriel Agreste to keep things lawful. 

Thankfully she was interrupted by a knock on the door, “sit down Sweetheart, I’ll get it,” her mother said as she lightly patted Marinette on the shoulder. Marinette did as she was told but didn’t touch the croissants. 

“Marinette, Sweetheart it’s your friends from your club!” Sabine called out. Confused Marinette turned around to face the entryway to see Dick, M’gann, and Connor in her house. 

“Today’s the day,” Dick said with a smile, “are you ready?” 

All Marinette could do was just stare at him, it even took her a minute to realize her mouth was open, “what are you guys doing here?”

“We came because we were worried about you,” a voice said, belonging to a young man with forest green eyes who was standing apart from the rest of her friends. 

“D-Damien?” Marinette squeaked, surprised to see him here. The boy didn’t give more than a shrug in response, his attention on anywhere but her. 

“Are you done with breakfast Mari?” M’gann asked glancing at her empty plate, “because all of us were planning on watching the broadcast together in our hotel room,” 

Marinette was still in shock, unable to form a complete sentence. Why in the world would they be here? It wasn’t their problem-

“We came because we’re friends,” Marinette glanced over at Connor, who always seemed to answer her unsaid questions, “we wanted to support you, both of you.” 

Marinette felt the tension leave her shoulders, and she smiled, “Thank you,” she stood up and tugged her bag over her shoulder, ready to go,  “I mean it.” 

 * * *

Marinette was overwhelmed, first by the size of Dick’s hotel room, and then by how many of her friends came to show their support. Perhaps she and Adrien weren’t as much of outsiders as they believed they were in the Justice League. 

As soon as the broadcast started Marinette had plopped herself on the edge of one of the seats within the hotel room. She sat tall and rigid, her nerves as clear as day to Damien who had settled in the seat next to her. Damien didn’t pay much attention to the TV screen, his eyes trained on Marinette and her ever-changing expressions. As the court case progressed, Marinette’s knee bounced in anticipation and she gnawed on her lower lip with nerves. Caught between concern and annoyance Damien placed his hand on her knee to cease its bouncing. 

Surprised, Marinette tore her gaze away from the screen to look at him. Her face red with embarrassment, “Sorry,” she apologized, her lower lip still caught under her teeth. 

Damien grunted in response and left his land resting on top of her knee, keeping it from bouncing. Marinette quirked an eyebrow, unsure whether or not he was annoyed with her or just concerned in his own way. Soon the court broke for recess and the live broadcast switched to commercials. Without uttering a word, Damien pulled Marinette up by the hand and led them outside of the hotel room. 

“What’re you-?” Marinette started to ask but trailed off as Damien stopped in front of a vending machine. He angrily fed it some euros and punched buttons, after, the machine spat out a bag of chips.

“Here, I know you haven’t had anything to eat,” he thrust the bag of chips out to her, “and you’re beginning to stress me out.”

Marinette gently took the bag from him, “sorry and thank you,” she smiled at him. 

Damien wouldn’t meet her eyes, “no problem,” he leaned back against the vending machine, “anyways who is this guy to make you this worried?” he looked back at her almost reluctantly, “is he your boyfriend?”

Marinette’s eyes widened and she let out a small laugh, “no, no we’re not dating,” she paused to figure out how to phrase their relationship, “he’s my partner, my person.” She opened the bag of chips and popped one into her mouth, “We met when we were 13 as civilians and had no idea that we were partners,”

Damien’s brow furrowed, “what do you mean you didn’t know?”

Marinette smiled, “just that, our master told us that we could never reveal our identities. That we could never trust anyone with that secret,” she shrugged, “and at the time we were so overwhelmed with everything going on we didn’t second guess the rule.” 

“Sometimes it’s easier not to trust others,” Damien said crossing his arms across his chest, “you’re safer only trusting yourself.” 

Marinette shook her head, “I disagree, when your fighting to protect others and risking your life,” she paused to catch Damien’s eye, “you don’t want to be alone, you want to have others supporting you and you have to be able to trust that they’ll have your back. And if that isn’t an option, you have to trust that they’ll make sure everyone else survives.”

There was a gravity to Marinette’s words that Damien wasn’t expecting. He knew that she was a hero, like his father, his brothers, like everyone in that hotel room but he didn’t realize how serious she was. She wasn’t a hero because it looked cool, she was a hero because she wanted to protect everyone even at the cost of her life. Uncomfortable with the sudden realization he changed the topic, “back to Adrien, how did the two of you go from not knowing anything to becoming partners that you’d risk everything for?”

Marinette huffed out a laugh, “we had to grow up,” she popped another chip into her mouth, “we learned what being Miraculous holders meant, that we were cosmically linked and the responsibility that we have to bear forced us to reevaluate what was important to us. And after what happened with the invasion, Adrien and I were done with secrets. If we were to be heroes we were going to do it our way, on our terms.”

“So what happened to land the two of you in this situation?” Damien asked, “I know bits and pieces from Tim and Dick but-” he trailed off.

Marinette folded her half-empty chip bag, “well, it’s a bit complicated. Adrien’s home situation was never the same after his mom died. His father pulled away from the public eye and Adrien was completely isolated in his own home. He was only allowed to go to school after some major convincing from our friend Chloe Bourgeois who is also the mayor’s daughter. And even then if he didn’t live up to his father’s expectations he was immediately confined back home. Long story short he was being abused and thought it was normal,” Marinette looked up from the chip bag, “and then we found out that his father is Hawkmoth,”

Damien’s eyes widened. 

“So to the public today is all about exposing Gabriel Agreste’s shitty parenting but for the League, the Team, for me it’s about ensuring that he’s safe.”  

Damien nodded, not knowing what else to say.  

Marinette just smiled as if sensing his unease, “We should get back, don’t want to miss the verdict.” 

Damien followed Marinette back to the hotel room. He watched her stare at the screen, hands wrinkling the chip bag. But his mind was elsewhere, when he first met the girl he thought he had her all figured out. It was in his training to observe and read people, to determine if they were threats or not. And Marinette seemed like an idealistic hero, just like the other kids he met through his father and brothers. Sidekicks who were training to be heroes because of a dream or because they somehow obtained powers. Kids who didn’t know the harsh reality of the world they live in, the reality that Damien had been trained and prepared for since his birth. He thought Marinette was one of those sidekicks, perhaps a little less idiotic but she was so kindhearted, so idealistic. But he was wrong, about many things. About Marinette’s strength, the reason why she’s a hero, and about her partner. Damien didn’t want to admit it but the little rich boy he had written off as a joke, as a poor excuse of a hero was actually a lot like him. 

“It’s over!” Marinette shouted and startled Damien. He looked up at the television screen to see Adrien with a look of relief on his face, and a scowl on Gabriel Agreste’s. The entire room erupted into a ruckus and suddenly, Marinette pressed a kiss against Damien’s cheek. Shocked, Damien lifted a hand, and lightly brushed his fingers against his cheek. He looked down to see Marinette with a big grin on her face, wondering what the hell had happened.

“Adrien won, we won!”