#The justice system dragged this case out over terminology

[coochiequeens]

The Canadian government wasn't confused about the term Woman before 1918. (That’s when Canadian women won their fight for the vote)

By Anna Slatz March 13, 2024

The Supreme Court of Canada has asserted that a lower court judge should not have referred to a sexual assault victim as “a woman,” a term which they claim was “unfortunate and engendered confusion.” The ruling, published on March 8, goes on to imply that the more effective term would be “person with a vagina.”

The case being discussed was that of Christopher James Kruk, a man from Maple Ridge, British Columbia who had been convicted of sexually assaulting a woman in 2020. According to past news coverage of the initial charges, the incident occurred the night of May 26, 2017, after Kruk encountered a heavily intoxicated woman in the city’s urban center. Kruk reportedly offered to ensure the woman got home safely, and then brought her to his residence via the SkyTrain and a taxi.

At some point during the journey, he called the woman’s mother on his cellphone to let her know that he was going to bring her daughter home. But instead, the woman reportedly passed out or fell asleep at Kruk’s home. Meanwhile, her mother was frantically calling Kruk, ringing him more than 20 times over an almost two-hour period without any response from the man.

The victim testified at the first trial that she woke up to find Kruk penetrating her, and that she tried and failed to push him off through her disorientation.

At around 4 a.m., many hours after Kruk had initially called her mother and told her she would be brought home, the woman’s father and brother managed to track down Kruk’s address using information from taxi cab drivers, and arrived in his neighborhood. When the woman heard her father’s voice calling out for her from the street, the woman rushed out the door wearing only her sweatshirt and underwear. She told her brother she had been raped, and filed a police complaint.

In his defense, Kruk claimed he never penetrated the woman, and that she had simply become startled when he had tried to wake her up, misinterpreting the sudden sensation as rape. He also claimed her pants were off because she had spilled water on them and that she had removed them herself while intoxicated earlier that evening.

Finding Kruk’s defense “fanciful,” Justice Michael Tammen found Kruk guilty of sexual assault in 2020, in part because he asserted that it would have been “extremely unlikely that a woman would be mistaken” about the feeling of penile penetration.

But a 2022 appeals court overruled Kruk’s conviction and ordered a new trial, arguing that Tammen had “engaged in speculative reasoning” and “made an assumption on a matter that was not so well known as to be notorious, that was not capable of immediate and accurate proof by resort to a readily accessible source of indisputable accuracy, or that was a matter of common sense.”

The Supreme Court of Canada has now found the appeals court erred in overturning Tammen’s conviction of Kruk, determining that Tammen had acted appropriately in the case. But despite upholding Tammen’s initial arguments, Justice Sheilah Martin took issue with Tammen’s description of the victim as “a woman.”

While she disagreed with the appeals court’s argument that Tammen’s ruling relied on “speculation” as to whether the sensation of penile penetration was readily identifiable, Martin did imply that the terminology needed to be changed.

“Where a person with a vagina testifies credibly and with certainty that they felt penile‑vaginal penetration, a trial judge must be entitled to conclude that they are unlikely to be mistaken,” Martin wrote.

“While the choice of the trial judge to use the words ‘a woman’ may have been unfortunate and engendered confusion, in context, it is clear the judge was reasoning that it was extremely unlikely that the complainant would be mistaken about the feeling of penile‑vaginal penetration because people generally, even if intoxicated, are not mistaken about that sensation.”

Martin does not specify what about the word “woman” could have “engendered confusion.”

The ruling, first highlighted by Canadian journalist Tristin Hopper, comes on the heels of recent controversy surrounding an updated guidebook on general practice issued by the Federal Court of Canada which references pronoun use.

According to the guidebook, “the Court invites counsel, parties and witnesses to provide information about the correct pronunciation of their names (phonetic or syllabic spelling), titles (Dr., Mrs., Mr., Ms., Miss, Mx., etc.) and pronouns (she, he, they, etc.) prior to and at the outset of proceedings.”

While amended in late December of 2023, screenshots from the guidebook began circulating on social media in February of this year, prompting backlash from those concerned with gender ideology’s impact on Canada’s judicial system. While some feared the process may be mandatory, Reduxx reached out to the Federal Court and was informed that was not the case.

“It is important to note that this is simply an invitation. Participants before the Court remain free to proceed in the manner that they prefer,” the Office of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court stated.

[stories-you-wont-hear]

– precedence. pt 1

hey everybody! it’s ya girl! back at it again! with a new story! in lieu of the final part of due process! i swear it is slowly coming together, but i want to be able to do justice to the characters in the story and give them an ending that’s neither cotton candy and butterflies nor... slushy snow and subway rats (does my idea of the bad end of things give away where i’m from lol).

 aNyWaY here is part one to what will mostly likely be a mini series/prequel to due process in which we find out why y/n is the way she is and how billy came into her life. 

bear in mind that this is the same reader from due process, but i don’t think you have to read due process to understand things here, however certain characters will cross over. i hope you all enjoy this, and please give me love! it is so difficult to find motivation to write things when no one pays any attention. i know i write for myself, and for the fun of it, but it can be tough TT enjoy! xoxo mira

   ___________________________________________________________

There was a special place in hell for the person who decided Latin would be so heavily incorporated into the American legal system. Was English not enough? You secretly figured the people who set up this whole shebang got into a pissing contest with each other and resorted to using fancy Latin phrases to try and one up each other, and as a result, you were sitting at your desk and poring over legal Latin phrases.

You were not about to be the next associate fired for fudging up Latin in a brief that ended up being presented in court by a senior partner, who got an earful from the judge and ended up losing the hearing on a matter of technical wording. That day had been about two weeks ago and since then, every single associate at your firm, Wesley King Randall, had been brushing up on terminology. 

Every free moment was spent scanning through reference books and a study guide someone had made, and all that was saying a lot since associates at any big law firm barely had time to breathe. From the corner of your eye, you saw one of the name partners making their way towards the area where the associates were situated and you quickly slipped the papers you had been studying from into your bag and turned to the papers on research about property law. Apparently not everyone had sensed the shift in the air as several other associates still had out their Latin books. 

“Didn’t you bumbling toddlers learn what mens rea means in whatever law school your daddies bought your way into?” the woman said as she walked through the playpen of associates, causing a wave of frazzled yuppies to quickly shut their books and turn towards the woman who would fire each and every one of them without a moment’s hesitation. 

“A guilty mind,” one particular young associate said. Big mistake. 

“Is that what your copy of Legalese for Dummies says?” she replied, eyes piercing through the man who had had the audacity to reply to her. The poor kid was now probably kicking himself for not interning at Landman and Zack. You sucked in your breath, unsure what his fate would be until another man walked towards the bullpen area.

 “Eva, you came to choose an associate, not to choose a lamb to slaughter,” Richard Wesley said, his teeth sparkling as he came in, shaking his head as if to admonish the woman with whom he shared the name of the firm. 

“It’s not my fault they’re all sheep,” she replied back bitterly, her mood seeming to worsen with the addition of her colleague.

 “How about Monty?” Richard suggested, gesturing towards William Montgomery Jr., who immediately stood up when his name was called. “I’d prefer someone who won’t call me a frigid bitch behind me back, Dick,” Eva deflected. Monty's face immediately reddened as Eva reiterated the words he had used to describe her last week at an associate's happy hour outing.

"The walls have ears, Mr. Montgomery," Eva cautioned, her eyes scanning the faces of the associates, who were all probably trying to hide either their fear or their contempt of the female third of the law firm.

Eva King was many things. She was poised, she was ruthless, and she did not give a shit what people thought of her. And now, Eva King was looking directly at you. "You," she said, and you immediately rose up, hand reaching for your bag without a word as she beckoned for you. Eva turned to leave without so much as another word, but you caught the look Richard Wesley was giving the rest of the associates, namely the male associates in front of him.

It was a look that was meant to pacify them. It wasn't that they weren’t worthy, Eva chose you because you were a woman. At least, that's what those man-babies would tell themselves as they nursed top shelf liquor tonight after work. It was the same reason why Richard Wesley doubted your ability even though you had just wrangled a property case for him just last month.

"I don't have time to coddle you," Eva said as you followed her through the firm, heading for the elevator. "I don't need you to," you replied, stepping into the enclosed space behind her. "That's what I like to hear," she said, granting you a look that was probably as close to warm as she could get.

"You were the one who figured out that clever little loophole in the Grant case will, weren't you?" she asked after a moment of silence. You attempted to pull back at the grin that wanted to pop up on your face, it was the very case Richard Wesley had taken as a favor for an old family friend, making sure that man would get every pretty penny from his grandmother's will. It was also the case that some second year associate had gotten the credit for just because he was being groomed for Wesley's good old boy club. Yet, Eva King knew what you had done. You had barely had a conversation since you started here three years ago, but she knew about you.

"Yes," you replied, hoping your faux indifferent tone was masking the fact that you were internally jumping for joy. "Don't be humble," Eva insisted, "Every goddamn thing you do here, you write your name in big bold letters on. You don't do that and some ass with a trust fund is going to write his own name on it." You attempted to take in her words as the elevator dinged, marking your arrival to the third and most prestigious floor of the firm.

The desk at reception was marked with the names of the partners in silver lettering and the woman behind it stood up as the both of you stepped off the elevator. "Mr. Russo from Anvil is already waiting in your office, Ms. King," the receptionist called as Eva brushed past her. "Of course he is," Eva muttered under her breath, heading towards her office.

"Stay sharp," was all that Eva supplied before she stepped into her office to find the man you presumed to be Mr. Russo going through the books she had arranged on the bookshelf behind her couch. You could've sworn that her office was probably just as big as your apartment, her desk facing away from the lounge area each name partner had in their office. Eva's was tastefully done, and was as chic as she was. "I think this Camus guy is pretty bleak, don't ya think?" were his first words as he turned towards the two of you, holding up a copy of The Stranger. "Sorry, I'll have Forrest Gump playing for you the next time you visit, Mr. Russo," Eva responded.

The man, who you couldn't help but ogle, was dressed impeccably in a suit you had worked long enough at this firm to know was worth your entire month's paycheck. "Billy Russo," he said, putting the book back on the shelf to step towards you, his movements precise as he offered his hand to you. You shook it, hoping you weren't still ogling him. "Y/N Y/L/N," you supplied.

"Have a seat, Mr. Russo, Y/N," Eva chimed, waiting until the both of you sat before she took a seat a few feet from you on the couch. "What's going on, Russo?" she asked almost immediately. Eva certainly did not beat around the bush, even with clients. "How I love your hospitality," Billy commented with a chuckle. "Can I get you anything?" Eva said exasperatedly.

"Just some fine legal counsel," Billy quipped back as you looked between the two of them. You had always seen Eva as a powerhouse, not taking shit from anyone, but this kind of exchange was almost like banter. You were seeing a new side of her.

"Well, it's a good thing you came to a law firm, isn't it?" Eva shot back, but this time with the tiniest of smiles. "I hear you lot are pretty decent, any truth to that?" he said, this time directing his playful quip at you. "That suit you're wearing isn't cheap, and neither are we," you responded.

"I like her," Billy said, turning to face Eva, who was nodding at you with a look of approval. "So do I," she began, avoiding eye contact with you as she said so, "And she's right. So we can keep making small talk for as long as you want, Billy." Billy smirked, and you knew he had the pockets to keep you and Eva here all day if he wanted. You certainly didn't mind the view.

"What was that joke?" Billy began, "What's the difference between a good lawyer and a bad lawyer? A bad lawyer can drag a case out for a year and a good lawyer..." "A good lawyer can make it last even longer," you offered. "Bingo!" Billy grinned. Eva's expression turned to one of weariness, and you cleared your throat, not wanting her to regret her choice.

"Sorry, Eva," Billy sighed, "I just can't help myself around beautiful women." His grin was wide as he leaned back against the arm chair he had chosen to sit in, and suddenly his face clicked. You had seen him in the papers and perhaps once or twice in the office on the rare occasion you had to visit the third floor. He was the CEO of some private military firm and had deep enough pockets to keep Wesley King Randall on as legal counsel. "Try," Eva replied dryly.

Billy's entire demeanor changed within seconds, sitting up and dropping the grin in exchange for an intense look as he pointed towards the file on the coffee table. "This is a contract that I made with a domestic company to provide accommodations to my men out in Iraq. They're set to go weeks from now, and then this son of-" Eva cleared her throat, raising her brow at him as she leafed through the papers. "Sorry," Billy mumbled, before shaking his head as if to clear his thoughts.

"Now they're telling me they can't provide me the service, and I've got men going out there with no place to go," he continued. "They called you and told you that?" Eva asked, her eyes scanning the pages in front of her. "Yeah, the guy didn't even have the balls to tell it to my face. Let me tell you what I would've done if he had had the gall to walk into my office and tell me that." "Please," Eva cut in again, "If it's not legal, don't tell me." Billy sighed, shrugging his shoulders a bit. He looked tense, his concern for the people who worked for him apparent.

"Fair enough," he sighed. "I just don't want my men out in the cold." You nodded sympathetically, eyes turning to Eva who had set the contract back down on the table. "Does this have anything to do with the fact that the wife of this company's CEO was the one you were laying it on at the gala last weekend? she asked coolly. Billy froze, the epiphany he was having drawing a a slow nod as Eva spoke. "I didn't know that was her!" he cried, "And I can't help it if my natural state of being is pure charm." Eva scoffed, and even you couldn't help but chuckle in reply to that comment.

"What am I supposed to do now? Wait until my men are out there without so much as a roof over their heads?" he said, turning back into serious Billy.

"It's an anticipatory breach," you spoke up, looking up at Billy. Eva nodded in agreement, her eyes on you as you spoke. "You don't have to wait to take legal action until they actually breach the contract. He already told you that they can't honor their part of the agreement. That in turn will affect your ability to complete the job your company was hired for. They could be held liable not just for what you paid them, but for the entire contract."

Billy turned to look back at Eva, who sat up straight, her expression unable to hide the fact that she was pleased with you. "That's right," she agreed, "We can hold them as liable before they actually breach. Do you have proof that he called and stated that on the phone?" Billy nodded, explaining that he'd need to get the recording of the call from the secretary who kept those sort of logs.

"Great," Eva said, standing up to follow Billy's movements as you did the same. "Get that to me and I'll have his head on a platter for you," she said as she began to walk him out. "Thank you, Eva," Billy said, tipping his head in thanks. "And thank you, Y/N," he said with one of those smiles. "It's my job, Mr. Russo," you replied. With that, he was off and you wondered if Eva wanted you in her office as she had taken a seat at her desk.

"Should I-" you began until she gestured for you to take a seat across from her. "You did good," she praised, and for a moment, you wondered if you were in a dream. Eva King, the woman who all the associates called an ice queen, was praising you while you sat in her office. "But you have to be the best," she continued, her eyes set on you. You tried to maintain eye contact, but her gaze was too intense and your eyes dropped to your lap. "I'm serious, Y/N, you have potential," she said, a bit gentler this time. You nodded, thanking her for the opportunity as you sensed it was time for you to return to your regular old cubicle three floors down. "And," Eva called as you got to the door, "Next time don't make it so obvious that you're ogling him."

  ___________________________________________________________

and boom! so that was mainly to introduce the story and the characters and of course, billy. let me know what you think and i hope to have the next part of this as well as the last part to due process out soon. much love, mira

[labbaik-ya-hussain-as]

A must read:

The Lost Jewel – Rediscovering Hazrat Imam Ali’s (A.S.) Letter

This is a fascinating story.

Pakistan’s premier female poet Fahmida Riaz, read a letter by Imam Ali (A.S.) while browsing through a translation of Nahaj ul Balagha. Today via email, she narrated how she was “so touched, and felt so angry for not knowing about it all my life, because really no one talks about the real jewels of Muslim history, they would rather conceal it from one generation after another”. She took notes from the ancient text and recently quoted it in her paper presented at an Urdu Conference held at Heidelberg, Germany.

On her current sojourn in the USA, she showed this text to Dr. Patricia Sharpe who was impressed enough to put it on her website under the title GOOD GOVERNANCE EARLY MUSLIM STYLE.

In her email Fahmida writes further that “Another American friend in Santa Fe is writing a book for the National Geographic about the achievements of Muslim thinkers and men of the sciences and letters. I showed him the text and he has asked me to forward it to him so that he may include it in his book. ‘The Americans should know about it ,’ he wrote. I have sent him the text, sighing to myself, “..and so should the Muslims”.

But really, what are we ever told about Islam or Muslims other than chopping of arms and killing of infidels? Or we are informed that Muslims once had a great empire, a brutal picture of conquest and subjugation of the so-called “infidels”. What do we know of Hazrat Imam Ali (A.S.) except that he was very brave with a legendary sword? Pretty little.

And writes Riaz: “here is this document, written by him,1500 or so years ago. The sheer beauty of his thought, the largesse of his great heart, the incredible refinement of his mind! It takes your breath away and brings tears to your eyes. And then, his understanding of the class structure of society.. long before anyone in the world paid attention to the composition of society! All this is so incredible.

The other ancient classics about governance that come to mind…. tell you how to invite your enemy to dinner and then stab him in the back. They tell you how to perpetuate your RULE. In comparison, Imam Ali (A.S.) is telling you how to create a State that provides the greatest opportunity for the people to be happy. So great was this man that even being remotely associated with him is an honour that we hardly deserve though we are all born in the fold of his faith.

Another thought that comes to haunt you: Hazrat Imam Ali (A.S.) was so close to the Holy Prophet (S.A.W) that he could never say what he did not believe to be the Holy Prophet's (S.A.W) own will? O my God! Then in what unworthy hands his teachings fell! How unfortunate it is for us.”

I wanted to share this excitment and sadness of Fahmida on this space.

Here is the entry in Patricia’s blog where she has reproduced sections of letter and also improved the translations available online:

George W. Bush seems to think that the US political system must be replicated in structure and spirit in order for people to enjoy a decent political system. In fact, the Muslim world also has traditions and texts which establish the principles of good governance. Below are quotes from one such document, a document that might profitably be added to all basic political science syllabi. A close reading might also provide insights and terminology for American public diplomats tasked to engage Muslims in a dialogue about the universal human interest in fair, honest and competent government.

Ali bin Abi Talib (A.S.) Wali-Allah, the First Imam and son-in-law of the Holy Prophet Mohammed Mustafa (S.A.W), wrote a long letter of guidance after appointing Maalik al-Ashtar to be Governor of Egypt. He advises the new governor that his administration will succeed only if he governs with concern for justice, equity, probity and the prosperity of all.

The passages excerpted below illustrate the timeless applicability of Imam Ali’s (A.S.) admonitions. The letter itself is contained in the Nahjal Balaagha, which is a collection of the letters and speeches of the First Imam.

Manifest religious tolerance: Amongst your subjects there are two kinds of people: those who have the same religion as you [and] are brothers to you, and those who have religions other than yours, [who] are human beings like you. Men of either category suffer from the same weaknesses and disabilities that human beings are inclined to; they commit sins, indulge in vices either intentionally or foolishly and unintentionally without realizing the enormity of their deeds. Let your mercy and compassion come to their rescue and help in the same way and to the same extent that you expect Allah to show mercy and forgiveness to you.

Equity is best: A policy which is based on equity will be largely appreciated. Remember that the displeasure of common men, the have-nots and the depressed persons overbalances the approval of important persons, while

the displeasure of a few big people will be excused…if the general public and the masses of your subjects are happy with you.

The rich always want more: They are the people who will be the worst drag upon you during your moments of peace and happiness, and the least useful to you during your hours of need and adversity. They hate justice the most. They will keep demanding more and more out of State resources and will seldom be satisfied with what they receive and will never be obliged for the favor shown to them if their demands are justifiably refused.

A healthy society is interdependent: The army and the common men who pay taxes are two important classes, but in a well faring state their well-being cannot be guaranteed without proper functioning and preservation of the other classes, the judges and magistrates, the secretaries of the State and the officers of various departments who collect various revenues, maintain law and order as well as preserve peace and amity among the diverse classes of the society. They also guard the rights and privileges of the citizens and look to the performance of various duties by individuals and classes. And the prosperity of this whole set-up depends upon the traders and industrialists. They act as a medium between the consumers and suppliers. They collect the requirements of society. They exert to provide goods….Then comes the class of the poor and the disabled persons. It is absolutely necessary that they should be looked after, helped and provided….at least the minimum necessities for well-being and contented living….

Ensure an honest judiciary: You must select people of excellent character and high caliber with meritorious records….When they realize that they have committed a mistake in judgement, they should not insist on it by trying to justify it….they should not be corrupt, covetous or greedy. They should not be satisfied with ordinary enquiry or scrutiny of a case but…must attach the greatest importance to reasoning, arguments and proofs. They should not get tired of lengthy discussions and arguments.Theymust exhibit patience and perseverance…and when truth is revealed to them they must pass their judgements….These appointments must be made…without any kind of favoritism being shown or influence being accepted; otherwise tyranny, corruption and misrule will reign….Let the judiciary be above every kind of executive pressure or influence, above fear or favour, intrigue or corruption.

Poverty leads to ruination: If a country is prosperous and if its people are well-to-do, then it will happily and willingly bear any burden. The poverty of the people is the actual cause of the devastation and ruination of a country and the main cause of the poverty of the people is the desire of its ruler and officers to amass wealth and possessions whether by fair or foul means.

Corruption undermines national well-being: I want to advise you about your businessmen and industrialists. Treat them well….They are the sources of wealth to the country….One more thing….you must keep an eye over their activities as well. You know that they are usually stingy misers, intensely self-centered and selfish, suffering from the obsession of grasping and accumulating wealth. They often hoard their goods to get more profit out of them by creating scarcity and by indulging in black-marketing.

Stay in touch with the people: You must take care not to cut yourself off from the public. Do not place a curtain of false prestige between you and those over whom you rule. Such pretension and shows of pomp and pride are in reality manifestations of inferiority complex and vanity. The result of such an attitude is that you remain ignorant of the conditions of your subjects and of the actual cases of the events occurring in the State.

Peace brings prosperity: If your enemy invites you to a peace treaty….,never refuse to accept such an offer, because peace will bring rest and comfort to your armies, will relieve you of anxieties and worries, and will bring prosperity and affluence to your people. But even after such treaties be very careful of the enemies and do not place too much confidence in their promises, because they often resort to peace treaties to deceive and delude you and take advantage of your negligence, carelessness and trust. At the same time, be very careful never to break your promise with your enemy; never forsake the protection or support that you have offered to him, never go back upon your word and never violate the terms of the treaty.

History reveals all: Do not reserve for yourself anything which is a common property of all and in which others have equal rights. Do not close your eyes from glaring malpractice of officers, miscarriage of justice and misuse of rights, because you will be held responsible for the wrong thus done to others. In the near future your wrong practices and maladministration will be exposed and you will be held responsible and punished for the wrong done to the helpless and oppressed people.

*The honorific changes, depending on whether the reference derives from the Shia or Sunni tradition. Note also that I changed British spelling to American, have modified some awkwardnesses common to translations into English and have altered some punctuation for clarity’s sake.

Pingback: The Lost Jewel - Rediscovering Hazrat Ali’s (A.S.) Letter « Jahane Rumi

[yasbxxgie]

Trial 4: how a teen spent 22 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit

Sean Ellis was 19 when he was arrested by Boston police over the killing of an officer in October 1993. Head down and nearly collapsing, barely keeping pace with police, Ellis wore his best suit as officers dragged him into custody – he had just attended the funeral of Celine Kirk and Tracy Brown, his cousins, who had been murdered by Celine’s ex-boyfriend in Ellis’s neighborhood of Dorchester. Ellis had spoken voluntarily to police about his cousins, with whom he was close; days later, he was on trial over the murder of a crooked cop as he slept in his car in a Walgreens parking lot.

Ellis again wore a suit in 2015, as Massachusetts’s highest court upheld a ruling granting Ellis a new trial, his fourth for the same allegation. The years in between, covered generously by the eight-part Netflix series Trial 4, held: two mistrials by hung juries, one guilty verdict based on evidence secured by officers later convicted of corruption, and 21 years, seven months, and 29 days of incarceration for a crime Ellis always maintained he didn’t commit.

The case against Ellis and his friend Terry Patterson over the murder of Detective John Mulligan, 52, was always thin: circumstantial eyewitnesses who didn’t testify in the third trial; the fact that Ellis, by his own admission, bought some diapers from the Walgreens where Mulligan was working detail the night of the murder; Mulligan’s stolen gun found near Ellis’s house by detectives later convicted separately for corruption. Stacking the deck against Ellis, as Trial 4 explains over the first half of its sprawling eight-hour runtime and quarter-of-a-century sweep, was the intense pressure on Boston police to solve Mulligan’s murder, a tradition of the mostly white police force tidying up cases with poor, black suspects, and widespread police malpractice.

The case against Ellis was swift in its condemnation of a black man with circumstantial evidence, but heavily freighted – a deep portal into the fraught law enforcement context specific to Boston, a city notoriously unwelcome to black residents, and an American criminal justice system weighted against defendants like Ellis. “Going into this, we were thinking: did he get a fair trial or not?” director Rémy Burkel told the Guardian. The answer, uncoiled and reiterated over an ambitiously diffuse eight hours, was a resounding no. The series, from The Staircase executive producer Jean-Xavier Lestrade, shows “as fairly as possible what happened in Sean Ellis’s case”, said Burkel – a miscarriage of justice that’s “happening in thousands of other cases”.

It’s clear after the initial episode, which includes interviews with former officers, police commissioners, longtime Boston reporters, and Ellis’s lawyers, that there was potential motive for any number of people not named Sean Ellis to kill Mulligan. Mulligan had one of the highest arrest records on the force, and was known casually as “plain view” – as in, the terminology on records (drugs and weapons “in plain view”) Mulligan used liberally to secure arrests without a warrant. In the wake of the killing on 26 September 1993, Boston police appointed a 65-member commission to find Mulligan’s killer, with leads that never factored in Ellis until he spoke to police about his cousins’ murder.

Trial 4, by contrast, takes little interest in the mystery of who killed Mulligan; the central mystery is justice gone too predictably awry. The first few episodes detail the context and systemic racism which snagged Ellis in the Boston of the early 90s: a city still reeling from the white backlash to attempts to desegregate schools by bussing in the 1970s, and a police force hobbled by basic errors. As outlined in a 1991 Boston Globe investigation called Bungling the Basics, Boston police routinely mishandled crime scenes, collected scant evidence, and relied too heavily on eyewitness testimony.

The middle section details Ellis’s first through third trials, which were riddled with flimsy evidence obtained through questionable methods. (Two of the detectives who investigated Ellis, Kenneth Acerra and Walter Robinson, later pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges, and a third, John Brazil, was given immunity from prosecution in return for his testimony). The final third follows Ellis and his longtime lawyer, Rosemary Scapicchio – dogged and unflappable, with conviction as bright as her Guy Fieri hair – as they secure a retrial and prepare for a fourth trial amid calls to reform the Suffolk county district attorney’s office more in line with the black and brown residents it frequently prosecutes.

As Ellis and Scappicchio prepare for a fourth trial by seeking evidence – withheld by the DA’s office – on potential eyewitness payments by the Boston police, Trial 4 covers the election of Rachael Rollins, a black woman who campaigned on criminal justice reform, as Suffolk county DA. “District attorneys are elected officials,” said Burkel. “If their office doesn’t get a certain amount of convictions, then you’re not re-elected. That in itself is a problem.” The footage of the campaign trail, which pitted incumbent DA Daniel Conley’s protege, backed by the police union, against several reform candidates, doubled as a public service announcement, said Burkel. “If your local DA is up for election, really choose your candidate and vote,” he said. “Get out there and vote, because you do have a voice.”

Like fellow Netflix docuseries How to Fix a Drug Scandal and The Innocence Files, Trial 4 plunges deep into the frustrating, arcane justice system in the US, with a running length that reflects the tortuous protraction of attempts to overturn a wrongful conviction. How to Fix a Drug Scandal, which also focuses on Massachusetts, details how pressure to prosecute drug cases led to misconduct in the underfunded, over-burdened state drug labs, exposing a system generally more keen to save face than fairly re-process the many lives derailed by overzealous and potentially faulty narcotics convictions. The Innocence Files delineates cases of wrongful convictions righted by the Innocence Project by common pitfalls of the American justice system that frequently land innocent people behind bars: flimsy forensics, prosecutorial misconduct, and over-reliance on eyewitness testimony – all of which were used to convict Ellis in 1995.

The common refrain, when watching each series in isolation, is that the American justice system is “broken” and in need of repair; Burkel himself said Ellis’s story “shows that the system is broken and it needs fixing”. But taken together, as crime series which refigure the dysfunction of American justice as the central mystery, the US criminal justice seems less broken than inequitable and interminable by design: streamlined convictions of b[B]lack and b[B]rown citizens, incentivized competition and convictions over fairness, and odds stacked against defendants.

Spoiler alert, although it is public information: in December 2018, just two weeks before Rollins was set to take office, acting district attorney John Pappas dropped all charges against Ellis in a last-minute press conference, citing weak evidence. The long exhale for Ellis was welcome but bittersweet; though the weight of prosecution was lifted, Pappas still deemed Ellis “culpable” in Mulligan’s murder. Ellis “wasn’t able to go to a courtroom to prove his innocence and exonerate himself”, said Burkel. Instead, the series “is kind of his fourth trial”.

The parting message, said Burkel, is that “people should be accountable – why aren’t district attorneys more accountable, and why aren’t police more accountable?” Public appetite for change on this is “evolving”, he said, pointing both to the surge in Black Lives Matter activism this summer and the platform that got Rollins elected as Suffolk county district attorney. One might assume accountability as the bedrock of any murder trial, or a criminal justice system; for Ellis, throughout Trial 4, it’s nothing but hard-won.

+Official trailer

Photographs

A shot of Sean Ellis used in Trial 4 Photograph

Rémy Burkel with director of photography Alberto Marquardt

Ellis with Rosemary Scapicchio

[writedayandnight]

u know what’s not a good idea?????? ?? ?? ???? 

deciding that you aren’t cut out for the pressure and anxiety of watching people post in the shifters rp while you’re writing the next post and decide not even to check FR or talk to anyone until you’re done (this decision was made sometime last week i think?) 

and so far the huge ass post introducing the hacker posse mission team is 5k words long, has six different pov changes and needs two more before it’s finished

fav pov written so far under the cut (warnings for choppiness and pre editing)

G sat on the van’s floor near the back, tuning out K’s music and Q’s excited chatter from where the two sat up front, his computer balanced on his knees and was skimming files. He wasn’t sorting through the map of the facility like he was supposed to. He did that until they got into the van and were on their way, since he knew Q could handle the memorization. Besides, they had a long ride ahead of them.

G was flicking through the shifter reports, a scowl twisting his face. What was going on in that facility… it was sick. Torture cleverly disguised as experiments, clinical trials hiding the truth, carefully hidden from the outside world for a reason. It made him glad he brought his bat case with him- doubtful he’d be able to use it, but if he could there was several employees he’d be happy to cave their disgusting heads in. The fact that they were springing an eight year old- a fucking child!- made his vision go red..  G wrapped his rosary around his wrist, tightening it until it dug into his flesh, and breathed.

Lawrence. Achingly human, too much fire and justice blazing in his heart. Not divine justice, no, and not the revenge that kept you warm at night, but the simple belief in the law and the humanity those laws stood for. G has had many arguments with Lawrence, enough to know that the kid was a stubborn son of a bitch, and had a strong conviction and trust in the law that most of the populace lacked. He wondered if the kid was okay. Probably. Lawrence was human, why wouldn’t he be? G couldn’t shake off the uneasiness over the situation, though.

What was the worst that could happen? G remembered the vivid imagery from the Human Centipede and other medical gore movies B’s dragged him to see and frowned, trying to focus on more… realistic outcomes. Namely, Lawrence pissing off some scientist with a screw loose by arguing over ethics, pulling up laws and little codes with enough confidence and drive that made you want to punch him in the face. And then the scientist actually punching him in the face, because Lawrence being disappeared by the fucking government meant that they could get away with damn near anything. He could picture it clear as day- Lawrence outraged, ranting about physical assault charges, abuse of power, kidnapping. “Maybe he didn’t learn his lesson. Hit him again.” Passion, the justice system. “Again.” A shield of laws he crafts around himself like it could actually protect him against the brutality of man. “Again.” Mockery, playful teasing with a sharp bite lurking underneath. “Again.”  Lawrence with a gleam in his eye, never could let the other person have the last word, wiping the blood off his face and saying-

“What’s with the long face, G?” Q was suddenly in front of him, jolting G out of his thoughts. His rosary slipped out of grasp, beads clattering loudly against the van’s metal floor as he straightened reflexively. G glared up into warm brown eyes and shrugged, shoving his rosary into his pocket, not wanting to let on how startled he was.

“Thinking about Lawrence.” He said gruffly, moving his fingers across his keypad to wake up his laptop. The rosary left marks around the back of his hands, but he shoved away the urge to trace them. Q nodded, a thoughtful expression crossing over his face before he crawled closer, settling in next to G’s side, half leaning on the van’s back wall and the other on G’s arm.

“I’m sure he’ll be alright,” Q offered, nudging G’s shoulder with his own. “We have inside sources, remember? They would’ve told us if Lawrence was hurt.” G scowled at Q’s blind optimism, his eyes darting towards the files still opened on his screen.

“Wouldn’t be so sure about that, Q. Seems like some pretty shady shit is going down in there- for all we know, Lawrence has become some (insert max terminology) because he couldn’t keep his trap shut and they decided making him into a punching bag would be better than listening to his True Justice rants all day.” G tried to keep the bitterness out of his voice but didn’t quite succeed. Q shook his head stubbornly anyways, his long hair flying all over the place.

“Becoming a punching bag would only give him more ammunition- man, now I’m kind of feeling sorry for those guys,” Q joked, and G huffed out a laugh, more out of habit than anything. That must have been what Q was looking for because he beamed and opened up his own tablet, burrowing deeper into G’s side.

G reopens the file folders, lingering over the names and faces. Wonders if maybe, after this mission, if when the howling monster inside of him isn’t satisfied, still out for blood (have you ever felt the need for revenge, Lawrence? For vengeance? Has the rage ever kept you warm at night, burning and burning and burning your heart and lungs and throat until all you see is red and old ghosts, close your eyes but you can still hear their screams and there’s only one way to satisfy it, God’s divine justice, Old Testament style baby-)

Wonders if maybe he and his bats could go on a little trip. Wonders how many he could- knock out of the park, heh- in one night. He digs deeper through the files, finding those with minor infractions, notes of violent tendencies and reprimands, those who seem to go a little too far in an already… precarious environment. Those whose experiments were overtly cruel, reporting pain with unfeeling medical terminology. Those without immediate families- kids and spouse, but really he only goes easy on those with kids- get saved into a special folder. Those who were recently let go, paid off, whatever. If they’re still in the area, they’re the highest priority.

Thought you could get away, huh? G grimaced, feeling cold satisfaction rising in him. Thought you could just leave and everything would be fine? That no one would find out about the skeletons in your closet, the people you killed? The people you tortured, you sick fucks? Guess again. I’ll be the one bringing the wrath of God to you. Give you a little taste of exactly where you’ll be going.

Colin Burgess gets placed at the top of his list.

The rosary in his pocket pulses with approval.