Even though he's more of a Dr. Who fan, my boyfriend has seen B7, and made what I thought was a good point. If the Federation had only one limiter, or only a few, why not implant it in Blake, whose violent impulses were likely to cause a lot more damage than Gan's?
And, by the way, why did the Federation have to go to the trouble of actually conditioning kids to believe that they were molested by Blake? That would make sense if there were a well-publicized show trial, where TV clips of the tearful child victims might lead to widespread revulsion against Blake. (Although why anyone would then be deterred from political subversion because of Blake's personal failings...) But in fact, the fabricated evidence was simply input into the prosecution marble that went into the Justice Machine. Perhaps they could have fabricated evidence that didn't have inconsistencies for Tel Varon to spot if they didn't have to waste time conditioning the "victims."
-(Y)
Dana Shilling wrote:
Even though he's more of a Dr. Who fan, my boyfriend has seen B7, and made what I thought was a good point. If the Federation had only one limiter, or only a few, why not implant it in Blake, whose violent impulses were likely to cause a lot more damage than Gan's?
Wild speculation alert. Limiters *didn't* seem to be commonly used, else I imagine we would have seen more of them on other criminal types. Gan always struck me as an odd candidate, being the most placid temperament in Blake's crew, *one* whole murder to his name and that, arguably, justified. It seemed a tiny bit of an over-reaction to pop a limiter on him. But that's me.
Maybe limiters are expensive. Feds didn't seem to have a whole lot to do with technology of reduced size.
I assume something of Gan made him suitable for an implant.
Gan's implant isn't situated near the amygdala, the site of the brain actually associated with violent impulses and emotional reactions, that is, in the vicinity of the frontal lobes. What's it doing on his crown?
As to containing Blake's violent impulses, I think his impulses would be more of a cerebral nature, thus would reduce a limiter's effectiveness on him. And the crime he was convicted of was not one of a violent nature.
Why does Gan get a limiter for killing a security guard, while Blake, who *nearly* kills someone of arguably more importance - Travis - doesn't?
Jackie
Jackie (Taylor) said:
Maybe limiters are expensive. Feds didn't seem to have a whole lot to do with technology of reduced size.
Precisely--so why not use it after Blake's first trial, when he had been convicted of violent rebel activity?
As to containing Blake's violent impulses, I think his impulses would be more of a cerebral nature, thus would reduce a limiter's effectiveness on him. And the crime he was convicted of was not one of a violent nature.
But the crime he was CONVICTED of the second time was a pure put-up job because of his initial political activity. One of the many ironies of the series, BTW, is that at the time of his second arrest, he was doing his damnedest to be a model citizen--he balked at going outside, and only turned up because of the bait of information about his family.
-(Y)
On Mon 11 Jun, jstaylor wrote:
Gan's implant isn't situated near the amygdala, the site of the brain actually associated with violent impulses and emotional reactions, that is, in the vicinity of the frontal lobes. What's it doing on his crown?
When they were putting the probes in his brain in 'Breakdown', what part of the brain did they look as if they were touching then? The key part of the limiter seems to be internal to the brain.
As to containing Blake's violent impulses, I think his impulses would be more of a cerebral nature, thus would reduce a limiter's effectiveness on him. And the crime he was convicted of was not one of a violent nature.
Sounds logical.
Why does Gan get a limiter for killing a security guard, while Blake, who *nearly* kills someone of arguably more importance - Travis - doesn't?
Because it was less of an automatic violent reaction, as you say above. Blake could probably kill in cold blood if he felt it necessary.
There's also the theory that Gan's limiter was experimental, though I'm not sure if I buy that as Kane certainly recognised it.
JUdith
PS. I'm back on list for a while. I missed you all more than the fingers hurt (if you see what I mean)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Shilling" dshilling@worldnet.att.net To: "nublake" blakes7@lists.lysator.liu.se Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 2:10 AM Subject: [B7L] Take it To the Limit
Even though he's more of a Dr. Who fan, my boyfriend has seen B7, and made what I thought was a good point. If the Federation had only one limiter, or only a few, why not implant it in Blake, whose violent impulses were likely to cause a lot more damage than Gan's?
I presume this is because the limiter is used to control people who are unable to control their own violent impulses. Kayn implies as much when he says that the alternative to putting an implant in Gan's head is killing him. Blake is subjected to a different kind of treatment because he is rational, therefore he has to be brainwashed. Of course, Gan doesn't seem the type to have uncontrollable violent impulses (except in Breakdown) but this is surely a tribute to the device's effectiveness. Ironically, the Federation actually make Gan a more likely resister by putting the implant in him.
James
James Mansson said:
Ironically, the Federation actually make Gan a more likely resister by putting the implant in him.
And the second round of brainwashing turned Blake from a model citizen into...well, Blake. And Servalan's treatment of Maryatt turned Travis from a loyal officer into a rogue (Maryatt haste, repent at leisure?) Things in B7 are constantly working out just the opposite of their planned objectives.
-(Y)
Dana,
You asked some very good questions about the fabrication of evidence in Blake's trial:
And, by the way, why did the Federation have to go to the trouble of actually conditioning kids to believe that they were molested by Blake? That would make sense if there were a well-publicized show trial, where TV clips of the tearful child victims might lead to widespread revulsion against Blake. (Although why anyone would then be deterred from political subversion because of Blake's personal failings...) But in fact, the fabricated evidence was simply input into the prosecution marble that went into the Justice Machine. Perhaps they could have fabricated evidence that didn't have inconsistencies for Tel Varon to spot if they didn't have to waste time conditioning the "victims."
You first asked why the Federation authorities went to the trouble of conditioning the children to actually believe that they were molested by Blake. The reason was to make the charges seem convincing to anyone who recorded and later read or watched their accounts of what they said happened.
As regards TV clips of tearful child victims, I presume that the trial was held _in camera_, with the public excluded, and restrictions on media identification of the victims, as is the case today.
You're right in pointing out the fact that Varon was easily able to find that the children had been seen by Dr. Havant prior to the alleged offences occurring. Compared to what a lot of lawyers have to do, Varon had an easy time of it, in terms of finding the information; but he and Maja didn't have a chance once they found it.
The reason why the Federation went to all the trouble of fabricating the evidence and placing it into the 'marble' was to give the public the impression that Blake had received a fair trial. The Judgement Machine wasn't tampered with; it was just fed the wrong data. Presumably, in relation to non-political offences, no tampering would be done; so the Federation could argue with some truth that its courts system was fair. If we look at the rest of the B7 crew, excepting Cally, none of them argued that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice; indeed, Vila made a joke about this in _The Way Back_.
Murray
At 13:41 11/06/01 +0100, you wrote:
<Warning: Plot hole nit-pick. People who not like nit-picking should look away now.>
You're right in pointing out the fact that Varon was easily able to find that the children had been seen by Dr. Havant prior to the alleged offences occurring.
This has never made any sense to me whatsoever.
Surely if the Federation are implanting false memories of abuse, the children should have been admitted to the clinic for memory implantation some time *after* the offense was supposed to have taken place?
The sequence seems to be - Blake is arrested at the meeting, the descision is made to fake the crimes, the memoiries are implanted, the trial happens.
The memory implantation in the children definitely seem to have happened *after* Blake was arrested:
MORAG: What we need is something to discredit him. If he could be deported to Cygnus Alpha .... Doctor, am I right in thinking you can create experiences, implant them into a subject, who will then believe that they really happened? HAVANT: Of course. In fact, creating an illusion of reality is quite simple. MORAG: Good. Then I think we can totally destroy Blake's credibility and get him sentenced. [to Glynd] But I'd like to do a feasibility check. [Gynd nods] Doctor, would you come with me please. HAVANT: As you wish.
The evidence Varon finds is that:
VARON: [To Maja] Well that's interesting. He was absent from school on the afternoon before the assault.
and:
VARON: Look at that: outpatient admission, identity unrecorded. And there's another. And a third. MAJA: Three unidentified admissions on the date the victims weren't at school.
All this seems to very strongly imply that the 'assaults' are officially recorded as having taken place *while Blake is in prison*.
This is obviously nuts. Being in prison is a fairly good alibi re: being out and about molesting children. Even the dimmest Justice Department rep is going to notice this some time before they have to start poking about in Central Records.
The alternative is that the Administration carefully faked a whole stack of easily discoverable evidence which would allow Varon to discover that Blake was innocent...and then, when he found it, carefully killed him before he could tell anybody.
This is also nuts.
The only other explantion I could come up with is that the records are faked to make it look as if Blake's arrest happened quite some time after it did (and therefore after the alleged assaults). This would make things tie up, but you'd still think Blake might have mentioned it.
Does anyone have another explanation?
Murray
love Anna
--- Anna Simpson wrote:
<Warning: Plot hole nit-pick. People who not like nit-picking should look away now.>
The only other explantion I could come up with is that the records are faked to make it look as if Blake's arrest happened quite some time after it did (and therefore after the alleged assaults). This would make things tie up, but you'd still think Blake might have mentioned it.
Does anyone have another explanation?
The only thing I can think of is that Blake is initially arrested on security grounds and was therefore able to be held without being charged of anything. The decision is made to fit him up. The memories are faked. Blake is then 'released' on security grounds and promptly re-arrested on civil grounds. This enables the administration to claim that Blake was arrested after the 'assaults' as the security arrest was not on civil records. Blake has been sufficiently disoriented by the events surrounding the massacre to have lost track of time. Varon assumes that Blake is guilty and Blake's defence is sufficiently vague "I am not guilty, therefore I offer no defence" to ensure that the evidence is not properly challenged.
Varon however has been sufficiently disturbed by Blake's horror when the charges are put to him to get a guilty conscience late at night. He and Maja go to check the records with the consequences we all know.
Incidentally, Varon seems to have been hand picked to defend Blake. He is obviously pretty naive about the extent of Federation tyranny and corruption. I suspect that Glynd expected him to go through the motions and lose the case, which he duly did. It must have been a nasty shock when Varon turns up at the office claiming to have uncovered evidence of a massacre.
Stephen.
____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
Murray said (about Blake's second trial):
You first asked why the Federation authorities went to the trouble of conditioning the children to actually believe that they were molested by Blake. The reason was to make the charges seem convincing to anyone who recorded and later read or watched their accounts of what they said happened.
But I don't think that there was any public record other than the outcome of the trial, not the evidence itself
You're right in pointing out the fact that Varon was easily able to find that the children had been seen by Dr. Havant prior to the alleged
offences
occurring. Compared to what a lot of lawyers have to do, Varon had an easy time of it, in terms of finding the information; but he and Maja didn't have a chance once they found it.
Awww, bumping off a lawyer in the first episode is like Harry Cohn's funeral: "Give the audience what they want, and they'll all turn out"
The reason why the Federation went to all the trouble of fabricating the evidence and placing it into the 'marble' was to give the public the impression that Blake had received a fair trial.
But all they needed for the "marble" was a WRITTEN record that so-and- so testified that Blake did such-and-such on this-that-n-the-other date; they didn't need actual kids to believe it
The Judgement Machine wasn't tampered with; it was just fed the wrong data.
Precisely--but there are easier to ways to input the wrong data.
-(Y)
Re Dana's original point, and ignoring the problems of dating etc:
And, by the way, why did the Federation have to go to the trouble of actually conditioning kids to believe that they were molested by Blake?
I think it's so that justice can be seen to be done, especially by Varon. cf the scene where Glynd assigns him to the case, and says: "I'm aware that I needn't say this to you of all people, but I will say it because I feel so very strongly about this case. I want you to do everything in your power to help the man. Our first concern must be to see that he has justice."
Varon is portrayed as a man well-known for his integrity; Glynd and co deliberately select him for this reason. They want him to be completely convinced of Blake's guilt, and to be able to tell any doubters afterwards that he's sure the trial was fair. Providing real live traumatised children was an important part of this.
Their mistake was to underestimate Blake's persuasiveness (probably because they didn't believe he could have renewed his forceful personality so soon). In fact, he's come on so quickly that he's able to analyse the situation very accurately: "The Administration has gone to enormous trouble - I mean, they've even put themselves at risk. There must be a number of people involved who know the truth. Now why? Why would they take that chance?" He correctly concludes that the stakes were high, and other methods of removing him from the scene politically undesirable.
--- Dana wrote:
Even though he's more of a Dr. Who fan, my boyfriend has seen B7, and made what I thought was a good point. If the Federation had only one limiter, or only a few, why not implant it in Blake, whose violent impulses were likely to cause a lot more damage than Gan's?
The initial treatment of Blake, turning him into a loyal Federation citizen was much more thorough than just sticking a limiter in his head. The Limiter didn't stop Gan helping blow up Federation bases, rescuing Avalon, chasing after IMIPAK and Orac and attacking Control.
I suppose, after the resistance made contact with Blake, and the Feds decided to fit him up and send him to Cygnus Alpha, that they didn't imagine that Blake would escape from the London onto a blooming great battle cruiser. I mean that was all rather bad luck !
And, by the way, why did the Federation have to go to the trouble of actually conditioning kids to believe that they were molested by Blake? That would make sense if there were a well-publicized show trial, where TV clips of the tearful child victims might lead to widespread revulsion against Blake. (Although why anyone would then be deterred from political subversion because of Blake's personal failings...)
Smearing one's political opponents is a tried and tested part of the business. I agree that it is irrational to move from "Blake is a paedophile" to "Resistance to the Federation is a bad thing" but it is a move that people quite frequently. When Roger Casement was on trial for Treason, the Cabinet released his diaries which contained detailed accounts of his homosexual activities. Quite what this had to do with Casement's support for Irish independence is unknown, but it did help to ensure his conviction and ensure that pleas for mercy were more than usually muted.
But in fact, the fabricated evidence was simply input into the prosecution marble that went into the Justice Machine. Perhaps they could have fabricated evidence that didn't have inconsistencies for Tel Varon to spot if they didn't have to waste time conditioning the "victims."
I think the important line is where Varon tells Blake that the children have all been tested by lie detector. The Federation judicial process, apparently, does not need the presence of witnesses as all statements have been verified before they are entered into court. Presumably Varon would be able to challenge elements of that testimony, as Thania did in Trial, had he been aware of Havant's activities before the Trial.
Stephen.
____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
Stephen said:
The initial treatment of Blake, turning him into a loyal Federation citizen was much more thorough than just sticking a limiter in his head. The Limiter didn't stop Gan helping blow up Federation bases, rescuing Avalon, chasing after IMIPAK and Orac and attacking Control.
It's like teleport bracelets--those often don't work as advertised either.
Smearing one's political opponents is a tried and tested part of the business. I agree that it is irrational to move from "Blake is a paedophile" to "Resistance to the Federation is a bad thing" but it is a move that people quite frequently. When Roger Casement was on trial for Treason, the Cabinet released his diaries which contained detailed accounts of his homosexual activities. Quite what this had to do with Casement's support for Irish independence is unknown, but it did help to ensure his conviction and ensure that pleas for mercy were more than usually muted.
But in that specific case, I think the psychological issue was "Is Casement a Good Person or a Bad Person?" with the usual belief being that homosexual activities were conclusive proof that Casement was a Bad Person.
I think the important line is where Varon tells Blake that the children have all been tested by lie detector. The Federation judicial process, apparently, does not need the presence of witnesses as all statements have been verified before they are entered into court.
Why not enter the verification into the record at the same time as the fabrication? Cake.
-(Y)
--- Dana wrote:
Smearing one's political opponents is a tried and tested part of the business. I agree that it is irrational to move from "Blake is a paedophile" to "Resistance to the Federation is a bad thing" but
it
is a move that people quite frequently. When Roger Casement was on trial for Treason, the Cabinet released his diaries which contained detailed
accounts
of his homosexual activities. Quite what this had
to
do with Casement's support for Irish independence
is
unknown, but it did help to ensure his conviction
and
ensure that pleas for mercy were more than usually muted.
But in that specific case, I think the psychological issue was "Is Casement a Good Person or a Bad Person?" with the usual belief being that homosexual activities were conclusive proof that Casement was a Bad Person.
Isn't the issue in both cases that smearing Casement and Blake was supposed to discredit their respective causes. The sub-text in each event being "Look at the sort of nasty people who oppose British/ Federation rule. You don't want to be associated with people like that". The same thing happens in politics whenever a politician is found to be having an affair. Their political opponents claim that it is a 'character issue' but I think the object is to somehow make the electorate think that socialists/liberals/conservatives (delete as appropriate) are bad people who cheat on their wives. Because people identify causes with the people who espouse them, discrediting the people indirectly discredits the cause.
I think the important line is where Varon tells
Blake
that the children have all been tested by lie detector. The Federation judicial process,
apparently,
does not need the presence of witnesses as all statements have been verified before they are
entered
into court.
Why not enter the verification into the record at the same time as the fabrication? Cake.
Ogilvy's Law. The name was coined by a prominent jurist who remembered from 1984 how Winston Smith created the record of Comrade Ogilvy, reflecting that after he had finished Ogilvy existed as an historical character on the same evidence as Julius Caesar or Charlemagne. The jurist insisted that before the data was entered into the justice machine the data be assessed independently otherwise the Federation could download anything they wanted into it (forensic reports, statements, you name it). Hence that funny little ritual where the prosecution and defence exchange futuristic globe thingies which symbolises that this has been done.
This reform was incorporated into the Federation legal system to huge acclaim. Acclaim which was soured somewhat when someone remebered that Orwell's work had been placed on a blacklist and promptly arrested the Jurist for possession of an illegal copy of "Keep the Aspidistra Flying".
The Federation seems to have an attachment to a rather baroque form of legalism, suggesting that they still have to take some regard for public opinion in the early series. I suspect that the Gordian knot was cut when the Empire was rebuilt in Seasons 3 & 4.
Stephen.
Stephen.
____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
On Mon 11 Jun, Dana Shilling wrote:
And, by the way, why did the Federation have to go to the trouble of actually conditioning kids to believe that they were molested by Blake? That would make sense if there were a well-publicized show trial, where TV clips of the tearful child victims might lead to widespread revulsion against Blake. (Although why anyone would then be deterred from political subversion because of Blake's personal failings...)
It could work. People hate to be tarred with the same brush. "We know you rebel types - you're all a load of paedophiles. Civil liberties? Hah! We know what you're really after."
But in fact, the fabricated evidence was simply input into the prosecution marble that went into the Justice Machine. Perhaps they could have fabricated evidence that didn't have inconsistencies for Tel Varon to spot if they didn't have to waste time conditioning the "victims."
Tel VAron interviewed the children himself, didn't he? If he could, then others obviously could, so I'd guess there would be some form of media coverage.
Judith
Judith said:
It could work. People hate to be tarred with the same brush. "We know you
rebel
types - you're all a load of paedophiles. Civil liberties? Hah! We know
what
you're really after."
I also wonder whether choosing that charge to fabricate had something to do with "something unfriendly" that the Federation does to convicted sex offenders.
Tel VAron interviewed the children himself, didn't he? If he could, then
others
obviously could, so I'd guess there would be some form of media coverage.
But the system could just as easily have been set up to give the defense no access to the prosecution witnesses--or for there to be nominal access, except something always happened before the scheduled appointment...
-(Y)
-
Anna Simpson -
Dana Shilling -
Harriet Monkhouse -
James Mansson ARGO -
jstaylor -
Judith Proctor -
Murray -
Stephen Date