THE PEOPLE v. Scott Summers - The Murder of Charles Francis Xavier

[The tall man]

Funny how the same people who defend Cyclops killing Xavier then turn around and condemn Bishop for "killing" Xavier. Also how is Cyclops an expert on the Phoenix, I thought that was Jean and Rachel. Cyclops sum worth of expertise regarding the Phoenix is standing aside and yelling JEEEAAANNNN! as she deals with it. Simply being in a relationship with a host of a cosmic entity does not make one an expert. But I guess when you don't know what you're doing you kick the living crap out of a teenage girl and call it "being prepared". Also Cyclops who can contain a piece of the VOID in his head and not get corrupted cannot handle a piece of the cosmic entity that he is the foremost expert on. I guess Rachel didn't qualify.

[Omega Alpha]

Funny how the same people who defend Cyclops killing Xavier then turn around and condemn Bishop for "killing" Xavier.

Difference is one was being constantly attacked while he had the Phoenix unwillingly (both for him and the entity) and did it when he was a) Not in full control of his actions; b) In war, while the other did it willingly.

Also how is Cyclops an expert on the Phoenix, I thought that was Jean and Rachel. Cyclops sum worth of expertise regarding the Phoenix is standing aside and yelling JEEEAAANNNN! as she deals with it. Simply being in a relationship with a host of a cosmic entity does not make one an expert. But I guess when you don't know what you're doing you kick the living crap out of a teenage girl and call it "being prepared". Also Cyclops who can contain a piece of the VOID in his head and not get corrupted cannot handle a piece of the cosmic entity that he is the foremost expert on. I guess Rachel didn't qualify.

Maybe Scott should be trying to kill Hope for 15 years and murdering billions so you could call him a hero.

[Omega Alpha]

Poor comparison.

American government kindly asks Frances president to cooperate against an alien that’s coming for the French grandchild. The American government was previously warned by the Queen of England ( who was tight with the French president). The queen of England has told the American government that the French president is acting weird.

American government is smart, they hid their army and said act if the president throw fits and that’s what the president did.
Cyclops used violence first.

Arriving with the full might of the American army in Paris/Utopia qualifies as "asking nicely"? And is Wolverine "tight with Scott"?

Your boy Tony and his pal Steve were the ones that caused this mess, and you know it.

[norj]

The facts disagree. The Sentinels deployed to the Xavier Institute were StarkTech Mk VIIs created by SHIELD under the authority of Anthony Stark and deployed by SHIELD (also piloted by SHIELD agents). They were deployed under the guise of protecting the remaining mutants after the Maximoff Incident.

Sentinels were created by Stark as a backup in case the Avengers, Fantastic Four or X-Men were defeated by or unavailable to stop a world ending threat and the agents piloting them were from the O.N.E.

[PsychoEFrost]

Sentinels were created by Stark as a backup in case the Avengers, Fantastic Four or X-Men were defeated by or unavailable to stop a world ending threat and the agents piloting them were from the O.N.E.

I have my copy of Messiah Complex in front of me. The pilots are clearly wearing SHIELD suits with the logos on the shoulders. Right before Cable turns them into a mess of wires.

[SneakyLookingSort]

Your Honor, I think Mr. Summers was framed for the murder of Professor Charles Xavier! There is no evidence against the possibility that Mr. Xavier used his powers to turn his own brain off.

[The tall man]

Difference is one was being constantly attacked while he had the Phoenix unwillingly (both for him and the entity) and did it when he was a) Not in full control of his actions; b) In war, while the other did it willingly.




Maybe Scott should be trying to kill Hope for 15 years and murdering billions so you could call him a hero.

The same Hope that everyone now hates and wishes she were dead and/or never created. The same Hope that Cyclops fans turned against when she rejected Cyclops and sided with the Avengers. That's who you want to use against Bishop, a character you and others don't even care about. And how is it that all the so-called "good" things Cyclops did with the Phoenix was all him and all the "bad" things he did were not him? Nice to have a convenient scapegoat to place all the blame on. I mean he's the expert right, how did the expert lose control?

[Striderblack01]

All rise as the Honorable Judge StriderBlack01 re-enters the Courtroom

Be seated.

Now that I've gotten a sandwich-er, gone on recess, we can continue analyzing the arguments presented in my absence.

It should be worth mentioning that:

• Charles Xavier is not on trial here.
• This Court is not interested in re-litigating AvX as a whole. Focus!
• The Court acknowledges that there was an on-going feud between two camps, one government-sanctioned Avengers group, and another group, led by the DEFENDANT, whose legal standing was a bit more nebulous during the time of the events.
  
  But the Court remains unclear as to why the initial brawl should lead to murder charges being upheld.
  If THE STATE wishes to present the Utopia brawl as evidence of a string of violent disagreements, precipitated by the DEFENDANT, as character testimony leading to the altercation with Xavier - it can make that argument.
  Otherwise THE STATE must explicitly demonstrate how this initial disagreement, on the beaches of Utopia, precipitated the death of Charles Xavier to the DEFENDANT's culpability.
  
  We aren't here to decide who threw the first punch weeks/months before.
  We're here to decide if the DEFENDANT is guilty of the murder of Xavier.
  Tie the two together convincingly, if you must, or move on.

---

THE STATE

Your honour, May I present that the defendant has been committing numerous of illegal acts leading up to the murder of Professor Charles Francis Xavier.

For which he will be tried in separate cases.
Until then, THE DEFENDANT'S pending criminal charges are inadmissible.

Please stick to facts of this case.

<pounds gavel>


THE DEFENSE

Your honor, I am asking for a dismissal of charges based on legal statute 3.1.1 of the State of California Penal Code: applied bias on the part of law enforcement.

On the date of May the Seventh in the year of our lord 2012, Law Enforcement officials under the banner of Captain Steven Rodgers asked for information regarding the defendant from James Howlett. We know now that Howlett gave misleading, if not false statements to law enforcement, a felony under California Penal Code 148.5. This meant that when law enforcement attempted arrest the defendant, they were operating with false information. I will cite the legal precedent of The People versus Daniel Gary Cook from 1984, in which Cook's charges of armed robbery were dismissed based on false information given in a Federal affidavit. These false charges brought about the chain of events culminating in the death of Charles Francis Xavier. I will also cite precedent in The People versus Orinthal James Simpson from 1996, in which the inadequacy of prosecution's manner of collecting evidence resulted in the jury deciding in a non-guilty charge.

Bias in this case can be proven with events in 2007, in which the same law enforcement team to which Captain Rodgers is a member, deployed anti-mutant weapons at the Xavier School in New York during the legal debate of the Superhuman Registration Act. This displays a clear level of bias by this agency against mutants, including the defendant who was head of that school at the time.

As a result, I am moving for a mistrial on the basis of law enforcement bias and poor legal standing.
Based on law enforcement's stated bias

Beautifully written and reasoned.

I do believe counsel has put forth a valid defense strategy (see People v. O.J. Simpson), which would fall neatly in the NOT GUILTY (Other) category.
Further, your argument presents insight into why the DEFENDANT was unwilling to cooperate with the authorities.

However, mistrials are commonly pursued on the basis that ill-gotten evidence & testimony have irreparably ruined the current trial's ability to provide accurate and good-faith arguments before the jury.
As the statute of limitations for Murder charges do not expire, granting a mistrial would land us right back here.
And, we've only just started with this trial.

Once again, the DEFENSE'S motion for a mistrial is denied.
Best move on, councilor.

I would argue that the charges being brought forth are not sufficiently reasoned to warrant a trial - the killing occurred on an active battlefield. Can it truly be called murder?

Uh...I called the International Criminal Court, and they we're cool with us doing this.
Feel free to make your arguments for Self-Defense.

[Hizashi]

Funny how the same people who defend Cyclops killing Xavier then turn around and condemn Bishop for "killing" Xavier. Also how is Cyclops an expert on the Phoenix, I thought that was Jean and Rachel. Cyclops sum worth of expertise regarding the Phoenix is standing aside and yelling JEEEAAANNNN! as she deals with it. Simply being in a relationship with a host of a cosmic entity does not make one an expert. But I guess when you don't know what you're doing you kick the living crap out of a teenage girl and call it "being prepared". Also Cyclops who can contain a piece of the VOID in his head and not get corrupted cannot handle a piece of the cosmic entity that he is the foremost expert on. I guess Rachel didn't qualify.

It's not the killing Xavier I condemn Bishop for, it's the years he spent hunting an innocent child and all the destruction he caused.

The X-Men in general had more experience with the Phoenix, and make jokes all you want, Scott was there for a lot of it. He's seen first-hand what can happen.

It's not that Cyclops was the foremost expert - it's that he had more general knowledge than the Avengers and more specific knowledge of the issue that the Avengers were trying to take control of.

Yeah, Scott was shown kicking Hope in one story - the same story in question that was determined to paint him in a bad light.

Containing a tiny piece of the Void in a sealed mind-box is not comparable to trying to control a sizable, damaged piece of the PF. All things considered, Scott handled the power admirably for longer than could've been expected - especially when you consider that as each P5 member fell, their corrupted portion of power went to the remaining members. And Scott didn't lose it until literally everyone was trying to kill him.

Rachel absolutely should've been involved but her exclusion was an intentional creative decision that made no sense pushed by Marvel, not a logically unfolding narrative decision - but then that sums up AvX in a nutshell.

[Shreene]

[CENTER]

I that Robin Thede?

[Gray Lensman]

It's not the killing Xavier I condemn Bishop for, it's the years he spent hunting an innocent child and all the destruction he caused.

The X-Men in general had more experience with the Phoenix, and make jokes all you want, Scott was there for a lot of it. He's seen first-hand what can happen.

It's not that Cyclops was the foremost expert - it's that he had more general knowledge than the Avengers and more specific knowledge of the issue that the Avengers were trying to take control of.

Yeah, Scott was shown kicking Hope in one story - the same story in question that was determined to paint him in a bad light.

Containing a tiny piece of the Void in a sealed mind-box is not comparable to trying to control a sizable, damaged piece of the PF. All things considered, Scott handled the power admirably for longer than could've been expected - especially when you consider that as each P5 member fell, their corrupted portion of power went to the remaining members. And Scott didn't lose it until literally everyone was trying to kill him.

Rachel absolutely should've been involved but her exclusion was an intentional creative decision that made no sense pushed by Marvel, not a logically unfolding narrative decision - but then that sums up AvX in a nutshell.

Up until that one issue, Scott's problems with Hope tended more towards him enabling her behavior. This is what happens when editorial mandated idiocy forces square pegs into round holes.

For the second bolded statement, when Cap when to Logan, Rachel was at the damned school, and nothing was said. Another case of the editorial mandate forcing a square peg into a round hole, this time by a steadfast refusal to try out the peg that was a clearly labelled match for the hole they wanted to fill.

[Omega Alpha]

Up until that one issue, Scott's problems with Hope tended more towards him enabling her behavior. This is what happens when editorial mandated idiocy forces square pegs into round holes.

This is something people are often ignoring, both when they say "Hope hated Scott in Utopia" when part of her arc was her getting to know and getting more comfortable around him as her family, and Scott being too hard on her, when sometimes the problem was the opposite.

[Zelena]

lol at how much xavier greasiness makes a lot more sense when you remember his middle name is francis

Guess where I live…

[BitParallel]

Be seated.

Now that I've gotten a sandwich-er, gone on recess, we can continue analyzing the arguments presented in my absence.

It should be worth mentioning that: [LIST]
[*]Charles Xavier is not on trial here. [*]This Court is not interested in re-litigating AvX as a whole. Focus![*]The Court acknowledges that there was an on-going feud between two camps, one government-sanctioned Avengers group, and another group, led by the DEFENDANT, whose legal standing was a bit more nebulous during the time of the events.

But the Court remains unclear as to why the initial brawl should lead to murder charges being upheld.
If THE STATE wishes to present the Utopia brawl as evidence of a string of violent disagreements, precipitated by the DEFENDANT, as character testimony leading to the altercation with Xavier - it can make that argument.
Otherwise THE STATE must explicitly demonstrate how this initial disagreement, on the beaches of Utopia, precipitated the death of Charles Xavier to the DEFENDANT's culpability.

We aren't here to decide who threw the first punch weeks/months before.
We're here to decide if the DEFENDANT is guilty of the murder of Xavier.
Tie the two together convincingly, if you must, or move on.

Your honour, the defendant was well aware of his mental state and the corrupted power he was harnessing. Nonetheless, it did not stop him from knocking out his girlfriend at the time(domestic abuse?) and obtain more power which he knew will corrupt him more yet he pursued it and finally resulted in Professor Xavier’s death. It was calculated and he admittedly said he would do it all over again. Meaning he does not regret killing Professor Xavier and the destruction caused by the defendant.

Maybe Scott should be trying to kill Hope for 15 years and murdering billions so you could call him a hero.

I’m lost! Who are you referring to?

Arriving with the full might of the American army in Paris/Utopia qualifies as "asking nicely"? And is Wolverine "tight with Scott"?

Your boy Tony and his pal Steve were the ones that caused this mess, and you know it .

OBJECTION, Your Honour.

Btw the army was in hiding, it’s a strategy.
Sure wolverine and the defendant were tight. The defendant trusted him to run a bunch of assassins and do the dirty work for the defendant. You need to be close to the person to trust them with such responsibilities.

[Maestroneto]

I have my copy of Messiah Complex in front of me. The pilots are clearly wearing SHIELD suits with the logos on the shoulders. Right before Cable turns them into a mess of wires.

Stark was director of SHIELD at the time.