Grimm Forum
Hexenbiestdom - Printable Version

+- Grimm Forum (https://grimmforum.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Grimm Universe (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Universe)
+--- Forum: Grimm Discussions (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Discussions)
+--- Thread: Hexenbiestdom (/Thread-Hexenbiestdom)



Hexenbiestdom - irukandji - 03-11-2018

I was thinking about New Guy's post regarding Nick finding Kelly's head in a box. As a result, I got to thinking about hexenbiests. They are wesen, so I wanted to pose a couple of questions for discussion.

When Juliette became a hexenbiest and subsequently burned the trailer and betrayed Kelly, what laws would she be subject to? Wesen Council or normal human? Both?

Elizabeth made a statement to Renard about the hat could be from the time of malleus maleficarum, and also adds it was a brutal time for their ancestors. Sorcery was elevated to criminal status and witches were persecuted for practicing magic.

Would the hexenbiest species view what happened to Juliette (kidnapping, beating, and force of a new persona) as persecution?


RE: Hexenbiestdom - Hell Rell - 03-11-2018

Juliette most likely wouldn't be subject to the Wesen Council because nothing she did risked exposing wesen. She would be subject to normal human laws if "street justice" didn't catch up to her first.

I'm not certain how Hexenbiests would view Juliette. She wasn't born one so they could look at her as an abomination of sorts or they could accept her as one of them and look at it as persecution. It really could go either way although I didn't get the impression that Hexenbiests really care all that much about each other.

Besides, Juliette wasn't just practicing magic while minding her own business. They might be upset about what happened to Juliette while at the same time wondering how she thought she was going to escape an awful fate. She did mess with a Grimm after all.


RE: Hexenbiestdom - New Guy - 03-11-2018

(03-11-2018, 09:04 AM)irukandji Wrote: I was thinking about New Guy's post regarding Nick finding Kelly's head in a box. As a result, I got to thinking about hexenbiests. They are wesen, so I wanted to pose a couple of questions for discussion.

When Juliette became a hexenbiest and subsequently burned the trailer and betrayed Kelly, what laws would she be subject to? Wesen Council or normal human? Both?

Elizabeth made a statement to Renard about the hat could be from the time of malleus maleficarum, and also adds it was a brutal time for their ancestors. Sorcery was elevated to criminal status and witches were persecuted for practicing magic.

Would the hexenbiest species view what happened to Juliette (kidnapping, beating, and force of a new persona) as persecution?
Hi Iruk,
You asked:
Quote:When Juliette became a hexenbiest and subsequently burned the trailer and betrayed Kelly, what laws would she be subject to? Wesen Council or normal human? Both?
Both.
The Wesen Council would be concerned that she used her hexen powers in public at the bar scene (where she was arrested), on the street where she tried to kill Adalind with the gargoyle and in prison using telekinesis to explode bugs. For certain, her bar room rant was noted and documented by her arresting officers. These would risk exposing Wesen to the Kehrseite world.
I do not recall what crimes were cited for her arrest at the bar so I will guess something like public endangerment, destuction of property and aggravated assault. Burning the trailer was arson. Her betrayal of Kelly and being present with Kenneth prior to, during and after the murder of Kelly makes her both an accomplice and accessory. Kehrseite (normal human) laws would have found her guilty of aggravated assault, arson and aggravated homicide. She was a maniacal criminal and deadly menace to society.
N G


RE: Hexenbiestdom - brandon - 03-11-2018

I believe that nobody "Hexenbiest" feels bad for being a " Hexenbiest".
They would consider " crazy" for not accepting how it is.


RE: Hexenbiestdom - syscrash - 03-12-2018

There is a problem with your assumptions. for one the show stated the property that the trailer was on was in Juliette name. For Nick to charge her with arson he would have to prove the trailer was his and he was renting the land from her. The problem with filling an arson claim is someone would have to investigate the trailer which would expose wesen secrets. The wesen catch twenty two.

The wesen council would not have a problem with dropping the statue on Adlind because no one would suspect it was caused by Juliette or any other wesen. They also do not have a problem with wesen killing other wesen no matter the reason.

The bar fight. The only problem the council might have is that she woged. But the guy was the only one who saw her. But then there are a number of episode where wesen used their woged to intimidate someone. which goes to the theory that woging is handled on a case by case bases. As for why she was arrested. When ever there is a confrontation it is asked who wants to press charges. She was in jail so we know he pressed charges. We don't know if she also pressed charges. As for damages, that makes no sense because if asked how she borke the lights no one would have an answer.


You can't just use your feelings about a character. to try an justify how the law would apply. As for what happened to Kelly. You may feel she is guilty. But if you watch the show you will see the writers left room for plausible denial. You may feel that someone has an obligation to report a crime. but actually you are not legally required to report. If asked if you have knowledge of a crime you are then obligated to tell what you know. There is also the excuse of Juliette having a fear of retribution.

Emotionally you may have a point but not legally either by wesen law or kersite law. If you watch you will see the writers made sure there was a way out for juliette. If for no onther reason they intended to have her work with the group.


RE: Hexenbiestdom - New Guy - 03-12-2018

(03-12-2018, 04:38 AM)syscrash Wrote: There is a problem with your assumptions. for one the show stated the property that the trailer was on was in Juliette name. For Nick to charge her with arson he would have to prove the trailer was his and he was renting the land from her. The problem with filling an arson claim is someone would have to investigate the trailer which would expose wesen secrets. The wesen catch twenty two.

The wesen council would not have a problem with dropping the statue on Adlind because no one would suspect it was caused by Juliette or any other wesen. They also do not have a problem with wesen killing other wesen no matter the reason.

The bar fight. The only problem the council might have is that she woged. But the guy was the only one who saw her. But then there are a number of episode where wesen used their woged to intimidate someone. which goes to the theory that woging is handled on a case by case bases. As for why she was arrested. When ever there is a confrontation it is asked who wants to press charges. She was in jail so we know he pressed charges. We don't know if she also pressed charges. As for damages, that makes no sense because if asked how she borke the lights no one would have an answer.


You can't just use your feelings about a character. to try an justify how the law would apply. As for what happened to Kelly. You may feel she is guilty. But if you watch the show you will see the writers left room for plausible denial. You may feel that someone has an obligation to report a crime. but actually you are not legally required to report. If asked if you have knowledge of a crime you are then obligated to tell what you know. There is also the excuse of Juliette having a fear of retribution.

Emotionally you may have a point but not legally either by wesen law or kersite law. If you watch you will see the writers made sure there was a way out for juliette. If for no onther reason they intended to have her work with the group.
Syscrsh,
I disagree with all of your statements. The show is fantasy, however it does provide some facts. For example your first statement relies upon:
Quote:the show stated the property that the trailer was on was in Juliette name
Where did you get that information? It seems contrary to:
http://grimm.wikia.com/wiki/Blond_Ambition
Quote:Later, Nick and Trubel drive away from Forest Hills Storage with the trailer hooked up. Nick says too many people know where the trailer is, so he bought a piece of land. In the middle of a forest, Nick unhitches the trailer, and he and Trubel put some things from Nick's car into the trailer.
http://grimm.wikia.com/wiki/Blond_Ambition/Transcript
Quote:Scene: Nick and Trubel move the trailer.

Trubel: Why do we have to move it now?
Nick: Too many people seem to know where it is, and we got this new stuff. It seems like a good time to find it a new home. I bought a piece of land. It's gonna be a lot harder for people to figure out where it is.
As for Wesen Laws the Council enforced, you should review:
http://grimm.wikia.com/wiki/Wesen_Council
Quote:The Wesen Council of Wallenstadt was a group of Wesen that governed Wesen law. The most severe law they enforced was the Gesetzbuch Ehrenkodex, also known as the Code of Swabia, which is the most important law of honor Wesen have. Part of the law in the Council said it was forbidden to use their Wesen side to disadvantage or murder Kehrseite, which was a capital crime.
I have provided the factual evidence upon which my statements rely. Do you have any such evidence to support yours? Could it be you are only presenting an opinion that is contrary to an factual evidence?
N G


RE: Hexenbiestdom - dicappatore - 03-12-2018

(03-12-2018, 11:55 AM)dicappatore Wrote: [quote='syscrash' pid='69547' dateline='1520854695']
There is a problem with your assumptions. for one the show stated the property that the trailer was on was in Juliette name. For Nick to charge her with arson he would have to prove the trailer was his and he was renting the land from her. The problem with filling an arson claim is someone would have to investigate the trailer which would expose wesen secrets. The wesen catch twenty two.

The wesen council would not have a problem with dropping the statue on Adlind because no one would suspect it was caused by Juliette or any other wesen. They also do not have a problem with wesen killing other wesen no matter the reason.

The bar fight. The only problem the council might have is that she woged. But the guy was the only one who saw her. But then there are a number of episode where wesen used their woged to intimidate someone. which goes to the theory that woging is handled on a case by case bases. As for why she was arrested. When ever there is a confrontation it is asked who wants to press charges. She was in jail so we know he pressed charges. We don't know if she also pressed charges. As for damages, that makes no sense because if asked how she borke the lights no one would have an answer.


You can't just use your feelings about a character. to try an justify how the law would apply. As for what happened to Kelly. You may feel she is guilty. But if you watch the show you will see the writers left room for plausible denial. You may feel that someone has an obligation to report a crime. but actually you are not legally required to report. If asked if you have knowledge of a crime you are then obligated to tell what you know. There is also the excuse of Juliette having a fear of retribution.

Emotionally you may have a point but not legally either by wesen law or kersite law. If you watch you will see the writers made sure there was a way out for juliette. If for no onther reason they intended to have her work with the group.

I have pointed out, on many occasions of some contributors of claiming their opinions as facts. but you are just making up facts that are not even debatable. What drugs are you on? Where you high when you were watching the show? I will just point out on one of your statements.

Quote: for one the show stated the property that the trailer was on was in Juliette name


Now, it is possible, Nick bought the and and put it under Juliette's name. Can you reference a scene or dialogue where it tells us Juliette owned the land? I can reference Nick claiming he bought the land when he moved the trailer from the storage yard, can you point out when its claimed it was owned by Juliette?

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and lets say, to hide ownership, he did put the land under her name and i forgot the scene when it was stated. Owning the land and even the trailer and putting the trailer on fire is still arson and unlawful. I don't know where you live, obviously, you are unfamiliar with your fire codes.


RE: Hexenbiestdom - brandon - 03-12-2018

In the spanish version Nick says that a friend of Juliette got the land but it's all made up.
Version in english:
" I bought a piece of land " Nick-3×22-


RE: Hexenbiestdom - syscrash - 03-12-2018

Quote:I will give you the benefit of the doubt and lets say, to hide ownership, he did put the land under her name and i forgot the scene when it was stated. Owning the land and even the trailer and putting the trailer on fire is still arson and unlawful. I don't know where you live, obviously, you are unfamiliar with your fire codes.
It is not illegal to destroy your own property. Take a house. as long as the bank does not own it you can bull doze it or do what ever you want. To burn it, the crime is not arson unless you are trying to claim the insurance. The crime would be endangering the properties next to the house. Because the trailer fire was in the forest. There could be a crime of endangering the forest because of the uncontrolled fire.

But being unlawful is not true. For a fact I have vacant land in the Mohave desert. I let a guy put his trailer out there. He paid rent for about two years then all of a sudden stopped paying. after being unable to contact him. the trailer was mine. For fun I blow it up. The only problem the city had was they made me clean up the mess. Using that real life experience. the difference with Juliette is she did not declare the property abandoned. But the writers solved that problem by defining the trailer as something that could not be known. This means since Nick could never clam the trailer. he could never depute that the trailer was not Juliette's. Now this does cause a problem with the wesen council. Because now she was be guilty of causing a situation that would expose their secrete when it is investigate why a trailer is burning in the woods and they look inside. But even that problem was solved by Next and Hank removing all wesen evidence.

Even though this removes the problem with the council with the council. It does not open up Nick's ability to fill charges because he impeded the crime scene by removing evidence that could lead to determining how and why the fire was started. The writers where pretty good at covering their bases on the problems caused with how they removed the trailer.

Which is why I find it funny how people keep wanting to try and prove something that the writers have made a point of creating a loop hole to excuse an action. Lets take Mari death. We assume it was either Adalind or Sean that sent the reapers. The fact is the writers never actual stated who sent them. This left each character with and excuse of plausible denial. Even though the writers had both character admit they where involved with trying to kill Kelly's sister. But even that the writers provided an excuse buy framing it in the context of a wesen going after a Grimm because of the key. Something perfectly acceptable in the wesen community. Even Kelly was shown to understand and accept that reasoning.


RE: Hexenbiestdom - dicappatore - 03-12-2018

(03-12-2018, 03:22 PM)syscrash Wrote:
Quote:I will give you the benefit of the doubt and lets say, to hide ownership, he did put the land under her name and i forgot the scene when it was stated. Owning the land and even the trailer and putting the trailer on fire is still arson and unlawful. I don't know where you live, obviously, you are unfamiliar with your fire codes.
It is not illegal to destroy your own property. Take a house. as long as the bank does not own it you can bull doze it or do what ever you want. To burn it, the crime is not arson unless you are trying to claim the insurance. The crime would be endangering the properties next to the house. Because the trailer fire was in the forest. There could be a crime of endangering the forest because of the uncontrolled fire.

But being unlawful is not true. For a fact I have vacant land in the Mohave desert. I let a guy put his trailer out there. He paid rent for about two years then all of a sudden stopped paying. after being unable to contact him. the trailer was mine. For fun I blow it up. The only problem the city had was they made me clean up the mess. Using that real life experience. the difference with Juliette is she did not declare the property abandoned. But the writers solved that problem by defining the trailer as something that could not be known. This means since Nick could never clam the trailer. he could never depute that the trailer was not Juliette's. Now this does cause a problem with the wesen council. Because now she was be guilty of causing a situation that would expose their secrete when it is investigate why a trailer is burning in the woods and they look inside. But even that problem was solved by Next and Hank removing all wesen evidence.

Even though this removes the problem with the council with the council. It does not open up Nick's ability to fill charges because he impeded the crime scene by removing evidence that could lead to determining how and why the fire was started. The writers where pretty good at covering their bases on the problems caused with how they removed the trailer.

Which is why I find it funny how people keep wanting to try and prove something that the writers have made a point of creating a loop hole to excuse an action. Lets take Mari death. We assume it was either Adalind or Sean that sent the reapers. The fact is the writers never actual stated who sent them. This left each character with and excuse of plausible denial. Even though the writers had both character admit they where involved with trying to kill Kelly's sister. But even that the writers provided an excuse buy framing it in the context of a wesen going after a Grimm because of the key. Something perfectly acceptable in the wesen community. Even Kelly was shown to understand and accept that reasoning.

You know, this post just proves that you are an idiot. If you think starting a fire in a wooded area is the same as bulldozing your own house, proves you are just stupid or a kid masquerading as an adult.

Better yet, take a walk to your local firehouse and tell them the same and see what their response is. Even better, find a forest firefighter and see what his response will be.

BTW, genius, before you bulldoze a house, in most municipalities, you need a permit. If you use any kind of explosive, even in Class 3 devices states, the ATF would be all over you. I guess I must have missed that part of the show when Juliette gets a permit to torch her trailer in a wooded area of the state of Oregon.

Time to stop wasting my time and ignore pure stupidity!

Came back to add this. If what I posted above gets me kicked off the forum, SO BE IT. If this forum will keep flocking idiots like this moron, not knowing the dangers of what a forest fires can do and the danger they pose to the men and women who fight to put them out? Then this forum is not worth it.