Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged" ?

[James Wright]

In the Star Trek Enterprise episode "Damaged" Captain Archer
made the decision to steal a warp coil from an alien ship, making it difficult for them to return home, let's say thet eventually made it bake and reported what happened, do you think that planet's government has the right to put Archer on trial for what he did?

JDW

 

[JiNX-01]

JDW said:
In the Star Trek Enterprise episode "Damaged" Captain Archer
made the decision to steal a warp coil from an alien ship, making it difficult for them to return home, let's say thet eventually made it bake and reported what happened, do you think that planet's government has the right to put Archer on trial for what he did?

JDW

I suppose so if they knew where to find him. They'd never heard of Earth and I doubt he bothered telling them where it is. So unless they run across the Xindi...

Now the question becomes whether SF would surrender him or fight their attempts at extradition.

I say they'd try compensating the aliens for their ordeal.

BTW, why stop at Archer? MACOs, Enterprise security and Trip weren't just along for the ride.

 

[James Wright]

Archer made the decision to steal the warp coil, gave the order to carry out the plan and in fact led the team.
If memory serves, one of his officers objected to the plan but Archer overruled those objections.

JDW

 

[ChristopherPike]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

It was Malcolm Reed who objected. I imagine Starfleet could've despatched a ship with a replacement coil, assuming Archer gave a full account during that debriefing we saw in 'Home'. Otherwise, it leaves him with a skeleton in the closet. Possibly a Khan-esque story where it comes back to bite him on the ass.

 

[JiNX-01]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

ChristopherPike said:
It was Malcolm Reed who objected. I imagine Starfleet could've despatched a ship with a replacement coil, assuming Archer gave a full account during that debriefing we saw in 'Home'. Otherwise, it leaves him with a skeleton in the closet. Possibly a Khan-esque story where it comes back to bite him on the ass.

I think Mal started to object, but he didn't really... it was T'Pol who went ballistic and smashed her data padd...

As to my earlier point: Even in a war zone, soldiers are not required to obey unlawful orders. Archer was ordering these people to commit piracy.

I submit, the aliens were within their rights to demand to try anyone who participated.

I'm not saying I disagree with Archer's decision and the willing participation of the others on his team. The stakes were certainly high enough.

I'm just saying there's a legitimate argument for the aliens to pursue trial, particularly if they lost crew members because they were unable to escape danger or maneuver to fight off attackers for want of a warp coil.

 

[Jax]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

A follow up story in season 5 would of been great.

Oh well

 

[Nebusj]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

JiNX-01 said:
I submit, the aliens were within their rights to demand to try anyone who participated.

I'd agree. Certainly in the reverse case Earth would argue that anyone who had preyed on their starship should be subject to trial.

In the circumstances I'd be surprised if there weren't reasonable compassion and understanding, given the nature of the crisis, but they would have good reason to demand Archer answer for it.

 

[Triptacular]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

I was waiting for the stolen coil to come up during Archer's debriefing in Home. It could of if they had been smart enough to make that a two-parter.

 

[James Wright]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

What do you think might've happened if Archer had explained the situation to the aliens in more detail and asked for their assistance in carrying out the mission?
How far were the aliens from their homeworld when they met Enterprise anyway?
Archer could've handled the situation better!

Ah, you gotta love script writers!

JDW

 

[SFRabid]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

Does anyone think it would really be worth a mention in a later episode? Maybe something like asking the Xindi to go help the stranded ship.

(Edited to correct a typo.)

 

[JiNX-01]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

SFRabid said:
Does anyone think it would really be work a mention in a later episode? Maybe something like asking the Xindi to go help the stranded ship.

Yeah, that would have worked for me! The aquatics could have easily gotten them home in no time.

 

[ialfan]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

JiNX-01 said:

SFRabid said:
Does anyone think it would really be work a mention in a later episode? Maybe something like asking the Xindi to go help the stranded ship.

Yeah, that would have worked for me! The aquatics could have easily gotten them home in no time.

Yeah even a throwaway line in Zero Hour would have wrapped this up nicely. Had Enterprise had a Season 5 I would have loved to see the captain of that ship come back for revenge.

 

[Timo]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

Even in a war zone, soldiers are not required to obey unlawful orders. Archer was ordering these people to commit piracy.

Then again, such piracy might be perfectly legal under Earth/Starfleet laws.

Nobody in Archer's crew pulls the crime card in the argument, after all. If piracy of this sort really were illegal, the fact would have featured in at least T'Pol's argument, which was coherent even if emotional.

I submit, the aliens were within their rights to demand to try anyone who participated.

By their laws, no doubt. But we're talking about the intersection of two sets of laws here. No overruling "interstellar law" would yet exist that would have been ratified by both sides. Instead, it might be that both sides would have preemptively written into their own laws a few clauses against trial by foreigners - especially when said sides got their first taste of alien species, and found out that alien laws might be really counterintuitive and in fact impossible to obey without prior chance to familiarization.

Just think what Klingon laws would probably be like. Or how a deal is a deal is a deal, but only between Ferengi...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JiNX-01]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

Timo said:

Even in a war zone, soldiers are not required to obey unlawful orders. Archer was ordering these people to commit piracy.

Then again, such piracy might be perfectly legal under Earth/Starfleet laws.

Nobody in Archer's crew pulls the crime card in the argument, after all. If piracy of this sort really were illegal, the fact would have featured in at least T'Pol's argument, which was coherent even if emotional.

I submit, the aliens were within their rights to demand to try anyone who participated.

By their laws, no doubt. But we're talking about the intersection of two sets of laws here. No overruling "interstellar law" would yet exist that would have been ratified by both sides. Instead, it might be that both sides would have preemptively written into their own laws a few clauses against trial by foreigners - especially when said sides got their first taste of alien species, and found out that alien laws might be really counterintuitive and in fact impossible to obey without prior chance to familiarization.

Just think what Klingon laws would probably be like. Or how a deal is a deal is a deal, but only between Ferengi...

Timo Saloniemi

Well, since Earth has presumably advanced in its civilization by that period -- no war for a hundred years and the living conditions worldwide have improved considerably, Trip reminds T'Pol in Broken Bow -- it seems to me that the world government and Starfleet would hardly have regressed on the issue of piracy (an act that was considered a crime at the time of the Roman Empire).

Now, that's not to say that Earth would have been inclined to prosecute, and obviously there is no extradition treaty with the aliens, so it is unlikely Archer et.al. would have been prosecuted, anyway.

Still I do believe the aliens -- had they gotten their hands on him -- would have held him accountable. And unlike the charges in Judgment, which were obviously ridiculous, the aliens would have had a case, IMO. At the same time, Acher would have had a strong mitigating argument for his defense. And it's quite possible he would be either acquitted or found guilty of lesser charges and released.

 

[Timo]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

Well, as recently as the past two World Wars, the most civilized among Earth's nations readily supported varying kinds of piracy. Not only were the commercial vessels of the actual declared enemy considered free game, so were neutral ships suspected of aiding this enemy.

High seas have always been the best stage for might-makes-right charades. Deep space would be the natural successor to that.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Smiley]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

I have no doubt that compensation was made sometime during the fourth season, whether it was by Enterprise or somebody else. It's not really interesting enough for even a throwaway line in my opinion. An interstellar law episode would have been more interesting than "Bound," but then the hard-headed alien stereotype would continue.

 

[Timo]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

On a more general level, we should have been told a few stories of what happened to all these peoples who formerly lived inside the Delphic Expanse. Surely the disappearance of this anomaly field would change quite a few lives.

One wonders if the dissipation of the Expanse is what made the Romulan War possible - by removing an obstacle from between Earth/Vulcan and Romulus. Or perhaps the Expanse had formerly blocked the way to Bajor and Cardassia?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[bluedana]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

This episode is the Trek version of an ethical dilemma that has plagued law students for decades: When does defense of self or defense of others trump the rights of another party? (Or, as Spock might say, when do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?) Usually it shows up in the "too many people in a sinking lifeboat" scenario, or the "stranded with no food and no hope of rescue" problem. Most students, in my experience, go into the discussion with a firm I would never... position, but in the end almost everyone holds their noses and agrees that there is a point where they would step over the line (wherever that is) and do something that in any other circumstance they'd consider illegal or immoral.

If I were teaching a law and ethics course, I would definitely use Archer's dilemma (show them the episode, even - anything to keep students awake in class) for this discussion.

As for whether Archer would be prosecuted, either by SF or by the aliens, my expectation would be no. Someone mentioned an "illegal order," but that begs the question (see above). I don't think the order would be considered illegal, ruling out either court martial or extradition. This isn't "piracy," any more than a homicide in self defense is murder. Perhaps the aliens would have had a case under their own laws - as the Klingons were justified in prosecuting Archer for interference in Judgment - but unless their philosophies were wildly different from ours (which could very well be the case), a good diplomat would be able to convince them to accept reparations.

 

[SeerSGB]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

According to Voyager Starfleet regulations back what Archer did.

Regulation 3 (Paragraph 12): In the event of imminent destruction, a Starfleet Captain is authorized to preserve the lives of his crew by any justifiable means.

I'm sure the case could be made for that rule to apply in "Damage".

Besides, how is what Archer did any worse than what Kirk did in ""A Taste of Armageddon", when Kirk ordered Scotty to fire to use General Order 24 (destroy the planet) just to get his ship free.

In both cases you can question the ethics/morality of their actions, but legally they're in the clear. At least from Starfleet's side of things.

 

[Nebusj]

Re: Star Trek:Enterprise episode "Damaged"?

SeerSGB said:
According to Voyager Starfleet regulations back what Archer did.

Regulation 3 (Paragraph 12): In the event of imminent destruction, a Starfleet Captain is authorized to preserve the lives of his crew by any justifiable means.

I'm sure the case could be made for that rule to apply in "Damage".

... assuming that Archer's Star Fleet runs by the same rules and regulations and legal opinions of a multi-species fleet with two centuries more experience, anyway. Although, Archer wasn't actually facing ``imminent destruction'' of his ship or his crew; they were just facing an awful repair job. And pirating a warp core wouldn't contribute to the preservation of the lives of his crew; in fact, it could put them in greater peril since then he'd be able to get into Xindi gunsights.