-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 11:21 PM 3/31/96 -0800, you wrote:
>At 11:15pm 3/31 Chae wrote:(in response to this)

>>        I have no idea why that should in way be seen as what you're
>>claiming...  What legal theory are you basing this under?  
>>
>Part international relations theory, part practical philosopy. It could be
[...]

        No offense but I take this to mean that you have nothing concrete to
stand on.

>>        Umm, Tenchi's school might disagree.  And what are you basing on
>>your position that Ryoko did not have her full faculty before witnessing the
>>'murder' of Tenchi? (from her awakening to witnessing of the murder)
>>
>It could be argued that Ryoko existed under subconscious threat of Kagato's
>return: But in fact I bet Ryoko would be unable to explain the school
>episode herself. 

        Well, I'd like to hear it.  Not just an excuse for it but a legally
relevant excuse.

>I think it would be easy to get a psychiatrist to testify
>that there was a substantial rebound period when Ryoko was disoriented
>emotionally. Yosho and his ship were well aware of Ryoko's likely condition,
>and have assumed a sort of guardianship. They should be held responsible for
>her conduct immediatly on release, as they took no precautions. I hope they
>quietly compensated the municipal authorities.

        Well, let's take some more recent examples.  There are three recent
cases where insanity, diminished capacity, and other debilitated defendant
defenses were thrown aside like so much garbage.  I'm talking, of course, of
the Menendez brothers case, the John Salvi III case (killed two
receptionists at abortion clinics), and Edward Leary case (fire-bombed NY
subway trains back in December of 1994 and, coincidentally improved the odor
^_^).  Insanity, and related, defenses are extremely hard to establish to a
point where they save the defendant!!!  The burden on the defendant to prove
it to a degree where it exonerates the defendant is nothing like what we see
on TV programs.  It's not in Matlock where some eminent psychiatrist
testifies and the judge just wisely nods his head.

        Remember, insanity and related defenses were not designed to remove
criminal and civil liability.  

        I don't know where you're coming from as far as guardianship, and
even less of a sort of guardianship where civil or criminal liability would
pass to the guardian.  Usually only state _organizations_ are held to that
sort of duty.  Even then "duty, breach, causation, and damage" must be
proven under modern tort standard.

>>        I dunno about this.  When Mihoshi crash-landed and her watch started
>>beeping, Ryoko seemed pretty tickled, finally to be noticed as the notorious
           ^^^^^
>>space pirate she was.  I personally haven't seen anything from the anime (in
>>OAVs as well as the TV series) where she had expressed regret over her past
>>errors.  Ryoko was flabbergasted when Mihoshi guessed Ryoko was a clockmaker!
           ^^^^^
[emphasis mine]
>        I read that entirely differently. Mihoshi didn't seriously think
>that anyone who could repair a proprietary piece of forensic identification
>equipment was a clockmaker. She is depicted taken aback with fear,
>confronting a powerful non-culprit, whom she wouldn't want to imply a false
>accusation on. The clockmaker thing is purely her air-head psychological
>self-defense at work.

        I mean before she went nuts about the watch being fixed.  But you
are completely missing the point.  Mihoshi may well be an air-head and all
her reaction based on the watch may likewise be attributed.  But I was
talking about Ryoko's reaction.  During the entire watch and space pirate
scene, Ryoko was pretty thrilled to (about to) be recognized.  How else
would you characterize Ryoko's smug attitude and utter deflation afterward?

>        Ryoko has shown the most certain of demonstrations of regret. She
>has changed her behavior. (a much more difficult feat than we usually
>credit) She cooperated with Aeka, an acredited representative of Jurai, and
>Mihoshi, an officer of the law, in fighting Kagato. She takes offense to the
>borders of self control when Washu tries to shift the blame for Ryoko's not
>knowing how to be human, clearly Ryoko understands that she now needs to
>learn how to be human. She has adopted a moral stance with regard to Kagato,
>and to Washu, that tells us that she values integrity and humanity above her
>own pain. She has submitted to a pseudo-guardianship by Yosho and Washu,
>living in the house and doing(grudgingly) chores, when it is easily within
>her power to live in the woods, or under the bridge, or wherever, and just
>hang around in the daytime chasing Tenchi.

        A more cynical observer may say she's doing that for Tenchi.  If
you're attmepting to draw a causal link between her modified behavior to
anything other than her love for Tenchi, to perhaps some miraculous growth
of moral fibre, I'd disagree.

>If we
>regard what we saw in the OVA's as accurate recordings of events, it very
>much appears that Kagato's control over Ryoko was absolute, enforced with
>terror and deception. 

        As I have said before, citing a few cases, this still doesn't remove
culpability from Ryoko.

>Someone, elsewhere, asked if his control was great
>enough to make her dance in a minefield? Actually, he was able to get her to
>put Tenchi in a sleeper hold, seconds after she had kept Tenchi from letting
>him try to grab the sword. 

        Non-lethal hold.

>Ryo-ohki distracted him with a bite, and she
>momentarily passed out from the strain of trying to resist him. He handled
>her like a caged tiger. Her first impulse on seeing him was to flee for her
>life. 

        She was also drunk and unprepared.  I think you may be going too
strong saying she was 'fleeing for her life.'

>She believed he was her creator, till his lie got too large, at the
>very end, and he tried to deny her her newfound humanity. Just how much
>repentance do you expect from a person who apparently had absolutely no
>control over her own actions or fate for 2000 years, a span we can't really
>imagine?

        I don't believe I ever asked for repentence.  You were the only who
said Ryoko showed regret many times.  Well, answer your own question,
however rhetorical.  And I believe you're going too far when you say she had
"absolutely no control over her own actions or fate for 2000 years."  

>        I say no to equity courts, simply because I don't believe that Jurai
>would pay the price. Someone would make the Japanese citizenship argument,
>and it would go back to Yosho-Tenchi-Tsunami-Ryoko-Ryo-ohki-Washu versus
>Jurai. Not a desirable confrontation from Jurai's standpoint.

        Huh?  Plucking her away from Kagato is one thing, but are you
suggesting that the cast of characters you mentioned above would violently
or otherwise oppose a legal proceding?  I remember no one raising an
objection to presentation of the bill in OAV 13.  And what price would Jurai
pay for equity courts?  I'm confused.

        Greg, I'm just not seeing a persuasive argument from you.  Most
everything you say seemed based on public policy, and that's fine.  But
public policy only goes so far, and this thread started on whatever
laibility Ryoko may have, and what defenses her diminished capacity at the
time could present.  I think I made a fairly good case that Ryoko is indeed
liable with case laws (which trump policy) that I cited.  Unless you can
base your argument on something more concrete than your own conjectures, you
won't shake my position.  Perhaps you feel your position is likewise
unassailable for whatever virtues you assign to it, and that's fine with me.
(you'd be wrong, but that's fine with me. ^_-)

>                                Greg M.

                                                --C h a e


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQB1AwUBMV/re6wxELHbcUd9AQGWDgL+PzTXD5lZhZ5D8bikRchosUqWQodwjO6m
QrACzE86ydXlC09nHd5kU7gWPoAqLP1MftU6uQDguVuEFgdOG1DQJpMXuEISSWmq
4HOaPH2QgJZcSn0+rfd9d2wSqaNKG0KO
=Ok3a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
                       chaean@hom.net  chaean@best.com
			 http://www.best.com/~chaean
		"I'm strangely attracted to Camille Paglia..."
			       "Is that wrong?"