Discussion in 'Jessica Jones' started by flickchick85, Jun 14, 2019.
Discuss the season 3 finale, "AKA Everything" here.
NO MORE SPOILER TAGS NECESSARY!
Well, unlike DD S3, this didn't feel like a proper series conclusion, but it was nice to get final showings from Luke and Kilgrave (sorta) one last time. And honestly, for the tone of the show, this WAS a rather fitting ending, imo.
As someone who always liked the Hellcat character, I’m a bit disappointed.
This is a bummer of a final episode. For the story they were trying to tell, it was well-handled. I just wish it didn't have to be this way. You could see Jess embrace being a hero at the end, which was pretty cool. In that sense, the story came full circle. Four Stars.
This worked for me as a season finale, but not as a true series one.
I honestly wasn’t sure how to take the Kilgrave part. Not the voice, but her reaction to it. Is Jess going back? Is she just taking a vacation instead of fully moving away?
It was nice to see Luke and that he too knows if he really does cross the line a crime boss, he’ll be fine with his friends stopping him. It was interesting.
That pizza Trish got and didn’t finish... the TMNT, Maguire Peter Parker, and Ben Affleck would be so disappointed.
I was happy that Trish realized and accepted that she became what she hated. Not sure if she bought into the idea that the seeds were planted from how Dorothy raised and treated her.
Malcolm scene with Zaya... Yikes.
Kith... that was cold-blooded. Sorry, J-Money.
The Raft's existence requires us to overlook the blatant ethical and legal violations that come with it. And nowhere is this better seen than with Trish's case. Like, according to Detective Costa, officials at the Raft somehow "pulled jurisdiction." How? No idea. That would be really nice to know, actually. I might be wrong, but I thought the Raft was created ad hoc for the Sokovia Accords. Which is weird because the Sokovia Accords are part of an international agreement and weren’t even ratified by the United States, so I don’t understand how they could possibly get jurisdiction over Trish when all her crimes are state crimes.
Now, at first, one supposes that maybe the Raft has changed, and now it functions as, like, a super extreme state prison. That would be…plausible, especially if it could also be used simply as a holding cell of sorts for dangerous individuals awaiting trial. But the implication is that Trish wouldn’t even get a trial. Which is terrible and shows the writers evidently having not done any studying of the United States Constitution:
Costa said that due process doesn’t apply to supers, which is a blatant violation of the Fifth Amendment (the right to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ) and Sixth Amendment (the right to counsel and a fair trial).
The punishment is disproportionate to the crime, which violates the Eighth Amendment (prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment). I've racked my brain repeatedly, and I just don't see how an underwater submarine prison is a proportional punishment for Trish's crimes. (This is ignoring that the United States has in real life avoided prison ships, most likely to avoid a repeat of the Revolutionary War prison ship martyrs, 12,000 POWs who died on sixteen British ships used a floating prisons)
Not only that, but it is explicitly stated that Trish is being treated differently because she’s enhanced. That is also known in legalese as a “status crime” (e.g. you’re being punished just for being who you are) which too, is unconstitutional.
I don't dispute that Trish deserved to be locked up for breaking the law. And I was on board with Trish being locked up until they said they were sending her to the Raft because, based on what we know, the Raft is so incredibly unconstitutional.
I doubt the Raft was created in response to the Sokovia Accords. They had a fully functioning floating supermax prison that clearly wasn't built overnight. If I had to guess, it had been built over time, maybe in response to the Incident in New York city or, at least, Ultron. Given that the FBI was involved in Scott Lang's case, my guess is superpowered crime has Federal jurisdiction, so it would be the Feds claiming jurisdiction.
As for Due Process and all that, I don't disagree. I took Costa's comment to be a bit hyperbolic, but we obviously never found out. It is true that both Hawkeye and Ant-Man received plea deals, so that would suggest a normal trial apparatus, but they were both in a privileged position as quasi-Avengers. They had people to vouch for them. But I wouldn't trust Costa's comments as 100% accurate.
Honestly if Trish could handle being free, Jessica wouldn’t hesitate for a second to perjure herself, destroy evidence and do anything to get her off. I believe the case against Trish would largely fall apart without Jessica's testimony, as Jessica was the whole reason Trish was even looked at as a suspect.
And if Trish got a good lawyer, they would use mental trauma and maybe "temporary insanity" as a way to get her free. Add in her mother’s murder, the way the police mishandled the situation, precedents with heroes losing control without being punished for it, and add in the fact that Trish is a great actress and extremely likable person who would have the jury eating out of her hand, and she'd likely be getting like an year in some fancy clinic and then be out on probation.