07-20-2015, 11:32 AM
(07-20-2015, 10:32 AM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: I remember an episode that I think can give us good elements for the discussion.
After Hank discovered about the existence of wesens, he remember a case he investigate in the past. He sent a guy to the justice. This guy was sentenced to death. The accused claimed to have been attacked by a monster and no one believed him, not even Hank. But after Nick tell him about the wesens, Hank questioned that maybe the guy was telling the truth.
With Nick help, Hank re investigated the case and proved the guy was correct saving his life. In the episode (as far as I remember) they used the law procedures to get to the result.
Now I play devils advocate. Imagine Nick was the first detective and had no way to prove only by law and procedure means that the accused was innocent. Because Nick is a grimm and would have information that the legal system doesn’t have, should Nick break the law to avoid the death penalty to an innocent? Or should he stay with the procedures and let the justice decide?
Someone would say that Nick would be prejudiced considering a normal person innocent because he killed a wesen. This is part of the question. How do you see this working?
Adriano, can you provide more details on this, like what the crime was, how was a wesen involved, why was an innocent man on the scene and how did an innocent man get charged, etc.? I'm sorry, I'm really lost on this one.
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.